Z5>ZZ 


A  HISTORY  OF  SIMONY  IN 
THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH 


FROM    THE   BEGINNING    TO    THE 
DEATH    OF    CHARLEMAGNE   (814) 


DISSERTATION   FOB    THE    DOCTORATE    IN    THEOLOGY    AT    THE   CATHOLIC 
UNIVERSITY    OF    AMERICA 


/ 

Keverend  N.  a.  WEBER,  S.M.,  S.T.L. 


BALTIMORE 

J.    H.    FURST    COMPANY 

1909 


Nihil  obstat  : 

THOMAS  J.   SHAHAN,  D.  D., 

Censor  Deputatus 
Imprimatur  : 

J.   CAKD.   GIBBONS 

Archbishop  of  Baltimore 


Baltimore, 

March  1,  1909. 


COPYEIGHT,   1909,  BY  N.  A.  WBBEK 
ALL  RIGHTS  RKSEEVED 


PREFACE 


It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  in  the  long  course  of 
the  history  of  the  Church,  there  has  never  been 
a  period  when  she  was  free  from  struggles.  Erom 
the  very  day  of  her  foundation  till  the  present 
time  she  has  been  obliged  to  wage  relentless  war 
against  internal  and  external  foes.  Her  internal 
conflicts  were  brought  about  either  by  the  failure 
of  certain  individuals  to  receive  the  complete 
body  of  her  divine  doctrine  or  by  violations  of  the 
moral  law  over  which  she  was  appointed  guardian. 
The  two  great  moral  evils  at  one  time  affecting 
the  clergy  were  incontinency  and  simony.  Eccle- 
siastical celibacy  and  its  violations  have  been 
frequently  and  extensively  written  about;  but  it 
may  be  safely  said  that,  up  to  the  present  day, 
simony  has  not  received  from  historians  the  atten- 
tion which  it  deserves.  Yet  its  history  throws 
considerable  light  on  the  vast  problem  of  the  re- 
lations between  Church  and  State,  as  well  as  on 
the  causes  of  the  moral  degeneracy  of  some  mem- 
bers of  the  clergy.  We  have  thought  that  perhaps 
it  might  not  be  altogether  useless  to  present  in 
the  following  pages  a  history  of  simony  from  the 
beginning  of  Christianity  till  the  death  of  Charle- 
magne.    Our  first  intention  was  to  bring  the  sub- 


iv  PREFACE 

ject  down  to  the  time  of  Gregory  VII.  But  the 
impossibility  of  handling  in  a  work  of  this  kind 
the  wealth  of  existing  material,  became  apparent 
in  the  course  of  the  study  and  forced  us  to  limit 
our  scope.  We  have,  therefore,  devoted  special 
attention  to  the  period  which  concludes  with  the 
death  of  Gregory  the  Great  (604),  and  brought 
down  the  history  in  a  more  concise  form  to  the 
end  of  the  reign  of  Charlemagne.  As  we  go  to 
press  there  comes  into  our  hands  a  study  of  the 
same  character.  Unfortunately,  however,  it  deals 
with  a  period  considerably  later  than  the  limits 
imposed  on  the  present  writer.^ 

It  is  a  pleasing  duty  for  the  author  to  acknowl- 
edge his  indebtedness  to  the  Very  Reverend  Doctor 
T.  J.  Shahan,  Pro-Eector  of  the  Catholic  Uni- 
versity of  America,  without  whose  aid,  valuable 
suggestions  and  never-failing  kindness,  this  work 
would  not  have  been  possible. 

IsTiCHOLAs  A.  Webee. 

Washington,  D.   C,   February  2,   1909. 


*  Drehmann,  Papst  Leo  IX  und  die  Simonie.  Ein  Beitrag 
zur  Untersuchung  der  Voi'geschichte  des  Investiturstreites. 
(Leipzig  and  Berlin,   1908.) 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Pbeface iii 

Abbeeviations xi 

Introduction 1-12 

CHAPTER  I 

SIMONY  FROM  THE  BEGINNING  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA  TO  THE 
EDICT    OF    MILAN     (313) 

The  close  connection  between  the  supernatural  and 
the  natural  order  —  Simony  contrary  to  the  Natu- 
ral Law  —  Judas  sells  Our  Lord  —  Existence  and 
identification  of  Simon  Magus  —  His  work  in  Sama- 
ria and  his  attempt  to  buy  the  Apostolic  power  — 
The  condemnation  of  simony  and  its  influence  on 
subsequent  times  —  Other  causes  of  the  inf requency 
of  simony  during  this  period  —  Tertullian's  com- 
parison of  the  venality  of  the  pagan  and  the  integ- 
grity  of  the  Christian  religion  —  Eusebius'  descrip- 
tion of  the  state  of  the  Church  —  Paul  of  Samo- 
sata  profits  by  his  episcopal  position  to  enrich  him- 
self —  The  origin  of  Donatism 13-29 

CHAPTER    II 

PREVALENCE    OF     SIMONY    FROM     THE    YEAR    313    TO    476 

Ecclesiastical,  judicial  and  civil  power  of  the  bishops 
—  Their    election  —  Simony   among    the     Arians  — 

Simony  among  Catholics Gregory  Nazianzen  and 

Maximus  the  Cynic  —  Chrysostom  and  the  accusa- 


vi  CONTENTS 

tions  against  Antoninus  of  Ephesus  —  A  synod  of 
Ephesus  and  six  sinioniacal  bishops  —  Clirysostom 
deposes  Gerontius  —  Isidore  of  Pelusium  and  simony 

—  Flavian  of  Constantinople  and  Chrysaphius  — 
Ibas  of  Edessa  accused  of  simony  —  Timothy 
Ailuros  at  Alexandria  —  Simony  in  Gaul ;  epis- 
copal election  at  Chalon-sur-Saone  —  Election  at 
Bourges 30-54 

CHAPTER   III 

THE     ATTITUDE     OF     CHURCH     AND     STATE     TOWARDS     SIMONY 
FROM    313    TO    476 

Pope  Siricius  and  ordinations  —  Utterances  of  Greg- 
ory Nazianzen  and  Ambrose  —  Conduct  of  Hilar- 
ion  —  Chrysostom  and  episcopal  elections  —  Sul- 
picius  Severus,  Jerome,  Augustine  —  The  forty- 
eighth  canon  of  Elvira  —  The  councils  of  Nicaea, 
Antioch,  Sardica  —  Letter  of  Basil  —  Pope  Leo  I  — 
Some  Apostolic  Canons  —  The  second  canon  of 
Chalcedon  —  The   patriarch   Gennadius   and   simony 

—  Edict   of   the   Eastern   emperor   Leo   I  —  Similar 

•     edict   of   the   emperor    Glycerins 55-77 

CHAPTER    IV 

SIMONY     IN     THE    WEST     FROM     476    TO     590 

I.  Rome  and  Italy: — Conditions  at  Rome  during  the 
period  —  Intervention  of  Odoacer  in  papal  election 

—  The  election  of  Pope  Symmachus  —  The  designa- 
tion of  Boniface  II  —  Vacancy  after  his  death  — 
Election  of  Silverius  —  Pope  Vigilius  —  Pelagius  I 

—  Eucaristus  and  the  bishopric  of  Volterra  —  Vi- 
talis  of  Milan.  II.  France: — Clovis  and  his  sons 
and  the  Church  —  Quintianus  and  Apollinaris  and 
the  see  of  Clermont  —  Gallus  and  the  same  see  — 
Cautinus   succeeds   Gallus  —  The   successor  of   Cau- 


CONTENTS  vii 

tinus  —  The  machinations  against  Aetherius,  bishop 
of  Lisieux  —  The  see  of  Rodez  and  Transobadus  — 
The  bishopric  of  Uz&s  and  the  civil  government  — 
King  Guntram  and  simony  —  Retrospect.  III. 
Otheb  Countries: — The  Vandals  and  the  African 
Church  —  Gildas  on  ecclesiastical  conditions  among 
the    Britons 78-108 

CHAPTER  V 

OPPOSITION    TO    SIMONY   IN    THE   WEST    FROM    476    TO   590 

I.  Opposition  at  Rome  axvd  throughout  Italy: — 
Latin  translation  of  the  second  canon  of  Chalcedon 
—  The  Roman  synod  of  502  —  The  "  Canonical 
Letter "  and  the  "  Liber  Ecclesiasticorum  Dog- 
matum  "  —  Letter  of  Pope  Gelasius  I  —  Enactments 
of  the  Roman  synod  of  the  year  499  —  Letter  of 
Pope  Symmachus  to  Caesarius  of  Aries  —  Pope 
Pelagius  I  and  simony  —  Anti-simoniacal  edict  of 
King  Athalaric. — II.  Opposition  to  Simony  in 
France  and  Spain: — Canons  of  the  council  of  Or- 
igans (533) —Council  of  Clermont  (535)— The 
fifth  synod  of  Orleans  —  The  second  council  of 
Tours  —  Letter  of  Pope  Hormisdas  to  the  Spanish 
Church  —  The  third  synod  of  Braga 109-129 

CHAPTER  VI 

simony   and   anti-simoniacal  legislation   in   the   east 
FROM   476   to   590 

Special  character  of  simony  in  the  East  —  The  question 
of  the  succession  to  Timothy  Solofacialus  in  the 
see  of  Alexandria  —  Theodosius  the  Cojnobiarch  and 
the  emperor  Anastasius  —  John  the  Recluse  and 
Anastasius  —  Paul,  patriarch  of  Alexandria  — 
Justin  II  said  to  have  been  guilty  of  simoniacal 
dealings  —  Justinian's  legislation  against  simony  — 


viii  CONTENTS 

Qualifications  of  the  episcopal  candidate  —  Payment 
of  admission  fees  prohibited  —  Oath  required  of 
episcopal  electors  —  A  passage  of  the  Nomocanon 
of  John  Scholasticus  —  Anti-simoniacal  legislation 
in   Armenia   and    Syria 130-145 

CHAPTER  VII 

GREGOEY     THE     GREAT     AND     SIMONY     IN     THE     WEST 
(590-604) 

I.  Italy: — State  of  Italy  at  Gregory's  accession  — 
Testimony  of  Agnellus  relative  to  the  prevalence 
of  simony  —  Gregory  and  the  archiepiscopal  see 
of  Milan  —  Gregory  and  Januarius  —  The  former's 
instructions  to  Castorius  —  Council  of  Rome  (595)  ; 
its  decree  against  simony.  II.  France: — Political 
division  of  France  at  Gregory's  accession  —  Ecclesi- 
astical conditions  —  Statements  regarding  the  exist- 
ence of  simony  —  Gregory's  letter  to  Bishop  Ver- 
gilius  of  Aries  —  Other  letters  of  his  —  He  writes 
to  Queen  Brunehilde  —  His  letter  of  599  to  the 
bishops   of  Gaul  —  Convocation  of  a  council  urged 

—  Another  letter  to  the  queen  —  Fruitlessness  of 
the  pope's  efforts  —  New  campaign  against  the  evil 

—  Letters  to  bishops  and  kings  —  Council  to  be  held 

—  Gregory's    efforts    are    again    fruitless  —  Simony 

in  Spain 146-172 

CHAPTER  VIII 

GREGORY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY    IN    THE    EASTERN    EMPIRE 

I.  Asia,  Egypt  and  Eastern  Europe: — Ecclesiastical 
policy  of  the  Eastern  emperors  —  Corruption  in  the 
empire  —  Letters  of  Gregory  to  Anastasius  of  Anti- 
och  and  Isaeius  of  Jerusalem  —  The  church  of 
Alexandria  —  LTnknown  result  of  Gregory's  activity 

—  Eastern    Europe  —  Trial    of   Anastasius    of    Cor- 


CONTENTS  ax 

inth  —  Instructions  to  his  successor  and  to  the 
bishops  of  Epirus  —  The  church  of  Salona; 
Gregory's  instructions  to  his  representative  An- 
toninus —  Honoratus  elected  bishop  of  Salona  — 
Honoratus  opposed  by  Maximus  —  The  latter's  con- 
secration —  Conflict  between  Gregory  and  Maximus 
—  Maximus  makes  his  submission.  II.  Noeth- 
WESTEBN  Ateica: — Ecclesiastical  division  of  the 
country  —  The  primatial  dignity  —  Donatism  — 
Catholics  allow  Donatists  to  rebaptize  them  for 
a  bribe  —  Catholic  bishops  yield  to  bribery  — 
Gregory  appeals  to  the  civil  government  for  help 
against  the  Donatists  —  He  vainly  tries  to  intro- 
duce a  new  primatial  organization  —  The  cases  of 
Bishops  Argentius,  Maximus  and  Paulinus  to  be 
investigated  at  synods  —  Letters  to  Bishops  Colum- 
bus and  Adeodatus  —  Council  of  Carthage  — 
Doubtful  Numidian  council  —  Gregory's  success  in 
Africa  only  partial  —  His  influence  on  Canon 
Law 173-199 

CHAPTER   IX 

SIMONY    IN    THE    WEST    FEOM    THE    DEATH    OF    GEEGOEY    THE 

GEEAT    TO    THE    DEATH    OF    CHAELEMAGNE 

(604-814) 

I.  Peevalence  of  Simony: — Papal  elections  and  the 
civil  power  —  Pope  Zachary,  Boniface  and  the  pal- 
lium-affair —  Charlemagne,  Alcuin  and  simony  in 
Italy  —  Simony  in  France  —  Occurrences  at  Sois- 
sons  and  Clermont  —  Charles  Martel  —  Ecclesiasti- 
cal conditions  under  the  Carolingians  —  Simony  in 
Spain  and  in  England.  II.  Anti-simoniacal 
legislation: — The  Liber  Diurnus  in  Italy  —  The 
Capitulary  of  Mantua;  the  council  of  Rome  and 
that  of  Forojulium  —  Councils  in  France  —  Regula- 
lations  on  special  topics  —  Spanish  and  Anglo- 
Saxon    legislation 200-223 


X  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  X 

SIMONY   IN   THE   EAST   FROM    G04   TO   814 

John  Eleemosynarius  and  simony  —  Prohibitions  of 
simony  by  the  council  in  Trullo  —  The  seventh  ecu- 
menical council  and  episcopal  appointments  — 
Controversy  regarding  its  fifth  canon  —  Admission 
to  monasteries  —  The  patriarch  Tarasius  and  his 
controversy  with  the  monks  of  Constantinople  — 
Conclusion 224-241 

Bibliography 243-248 

Index 249-254 


PRINCIPAL  ABBREVIATIONS   USED   IN   THE   WORK 


AA.  SS.  =  Acta  Sanctorum  Bollandiana. 

Bibl.  Rer.  Ger.  =  Bibliotheca  Rerum  Gernianicarum. 

Bouquet  =  Recueil    des    Hiatoriens    des    Gaules,    edited    by 

Bouquet-Delisle. 
Gams,  Kg.  v.  Span.  =  Gams,  Kirchengeschiehte  von  Spanien. 
Hefele  or  Hefele  Cg.  or  Concg.  =  Hefele,  Conciliengeschichte, 
Jaffe  or  Jaffe  Reg.  =  Regesta  Pontificum  Romanorum,  edited 

by    JafFe-Lowenfeld,    etc. 
Lib.  Pont.  =  Liber  Pontificalis. 

Mansi  =  Sacrorum  Conciliorum  Collectio,  edited  by  Mansi. 
MGH.  Auct.  Ant.  =  Monumenta  Germaniae  Historica,  Auc- 

tores  Antiquissimi. 
MGH.  Epp.  =  Monumenta  Germaniae  Historica,  Epistolae. 
MGH.   SS.  =  Monumenta   Germaniae   Historica,   Scriptores. 
PG.  =  Migne,  Patrologia  Graeca. 
PL,  =  Migne,  Patrologia  Latina.^ 

Thiel   or   Thiel,   Epp.  =  Epistolae   Romanorum   Pontificum, 
edited  by  Thiel. 

^In  referring  to  these  two  collections  (PG.  and  PL.)  only 
Arabic  numerals  are  used;  the  first  number  refers  to  the 
volume,  the  second  to  the  column. 


XI 


A  HISTORY   OF   SIMONY 


INTRODUCTION 

SIMONY    AS    IT    IS    UNDERSTOOD    TO-DAY;    ITS 
TREATMENT  IN  THE  PRESENT  WORK 

The  word  simony  is  of  late  origin  and  acquired 
its  present  meaning  by  a  gradual  process.  The 
first  step  towards  its  introduction  was  taken  when 
the  sale  of  supernatural  favors  for  temporal  ad- 
vantages was  considered  in  relation  with  the  sin 
of  Simon  Magus  (Acts,  viii,  18-2-i).  Several  of 
the  fathers  of  the  fourth  century,  as  Basil,  Am- 
brose, Chrysostom,  Jerome,  instituted  such  a 
comparison.^  From  this  assertion  of  similarity 
in  sin,  it  was  but  a  step  to  the  use  of  the  adjective 
"  simoniacal,"  which  is  found  in  Pelagius  I  -  and 
is  of  such  frequent  occurrence  in  the  correspond- 
ence of  Gregory  the  Great.  The  noun  "  simony  " 
came  into  use  at  a  still  later  date. 

As  to  the  thing  itself  for  which  simony  stands, 
it  is  found  in  the  very  beginning  of  the  Christian 
religion   and,    to   a   considerable   extent,    even   in 

^  See  below,  jjp.  57,  58,  59,  63  and  also  p.  64,  where  the 
thirtieth  canon  of  the  Apostles  is  given. 
•Lib.   Pont.  I,   303,   ed.   Duchesne. 
1 


2  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

pre-Christian  times.  But  before  we  enter  upon 
any  historical  discussion,  a  brief  exposition  of 
simony  as  it  is  understood  to-day  seems  necessary. 
In  this  matter  modern  writers  usually  adopt  the 
definition  of  Thomas  Aquinas ;  ^  "  A  deliberate 
design  of  selling  or  buying  for  a  temporal  price, 
such  things  as  are  spiritual  or  annexed  unto 
spirituals."  To  this  definition,  however,  there 
are  serious  objections,  already  pointed  out  by 
Leinz.^  In  the  first  place  it  speaks  only  of  pur- 
chase and  sale,  whereas  any  contract,  any  legally 
binding  transaction,  in  which  an  exchange  of  the 
above-specified  objects  takes  place,  suffices  to  con- 
stitute the  sin  of  simony.  Secondly,  the  term 
"  spiritual  "  is  too  comprehensive  to  be  used  here ; 
for  there  can  be  question  only  of  a  certain  class 
of  spiritual  things.  The  natural  knowledge  of  the 
human  mind  is  undoubtedly  spiritual;  yet  it  has 
absolutely  nothing  to  do  with  simony.  Only  such 
spiritual  objects  as  are  conducive  to  the  eternal 
happiness  of  the  soul,  or  in  some  way  connected 
with  it,  come  under  consideration.  In  general 
language  it  is,  of  course,  permissible  to  use  the 
term  spiritual  in  this  restricted  sense;  but  it  is 

"  Summa  Theol.  iida,  iidae,  Quaest.  100,  a.  1.  "  Studiosa 
voluntas  emendi  vel  vendendi  aliquid  spirituale,  vel 
spirituali   annexum    [pretio   temporal!]. " 

*  Die  Simonie  (Freiburg,  1902),  40-41.  Also  ArcMv  fiir 
Kath.  Kirchenrecht    (1897),  Lxxvii,  267-72. 


INTRODUCTION  3 

out  of  place  in  a  definition.  The  word  super- 
natural should  be  substituted  for  the  word 
spiritual;  for,  although  everything  supernatural 
is  also  spiritual,  the  reverse  is  not  true.  With 
regard  to  the  extent  of  the  definition,  we  may  for 
the  moment  overlook  the  fact  that  it  does  not 
include  that  class  of  simony  having  its  origin  in 
merely  ecclesiastical  law  (simonia  juris  ecclesi- 
astici),  this  being  a  variable  and  accidental  ampli- 
fication of  the  term. 

From  the  preceding  considerations  we  are  led 
to  define  simony :  "  The  intended  or  real  exchange 
of  a  supernatural  good,  or  a  natural  good  annexed 
thereto,  for  something  that  is  temporal."  Three 
elements  may  here  be  distinguished :  1.  The  super- 
natural object;  2.  The  temporal  price;  3.  The 
idea  of  exchange.  The  existence  of  a  deliberate 
intention  to  make  an  exchange  of  a  supernatural 
good  for  a  natural  suffices  for  the  commission  of 
simony;  for  this  sin,  like  every  other,  may  be 
committed  merely  internally.  Its  very  nature, 
however,  usually  leads  to  an  external  expression 
of  the  intention  and  so  much  so  that  some  writers 
use  the  word  simony  only  where  there  has  been 
such  an  expression.  As  the  Church  does  not 
judge  of  interior  dispositions,  it  is  certain  that 
ecclesiastical  penalties  are  incurred  only  by  some 
outward  manifestation.  The  giving  of  one  thing 
as  the  price  of  another  is  not  an  indispensable 


4  A    HISTOEY    OF    SIMONY 

requisite  for  the  existence  of  simony;  it  suffices 
that  the  determining  motive  of  the  action  of  one 
party  be  to  obtain  compensation  from  the  other. ^ 
But  this  should  not  be  taken  to  mean  that  simony 
is  committed  by  one  who,  in  the  hope  of  obtaining 
through  gratitude  an  ecclesiastical  benefice  or  such 
like  favor,  obliges  his  ecclesiastical  superior  in  a 
temporal  fashion. 

The  temporal  price  is  commonly  distinguished, 
according  to  Canon  Law  ^  into  the  "  Munus  a 
manu,  munus  a  lingua  and  munus  ah  obsequio." 
The  "  7nunus  a  manu  "  comprises  not  only  money, 
but  also  all  movable  or  immovable  property  and 
all  rights  appreciable  in  monetary  value.  The 
"  Munus  a  lingua "  includes  oral  commendation, 
public  expressions  of  approval,  moral  support  in 
high  places;  for  example,  the  appointment  to  a 
benefice  with  the  understanding  that  in  influential 
circles  the  appointee  v/ill  speak  favorably  of  the 
person  to  whom  he  owes  his  office.  The  demon- 
stration of  undue  subjection  and  the  rendering  of 
services  not  due  to  a  person,  with  the  intention 
of  obtaining  compensation,  are  expressed  in  the 
"  munus  ah  obsequio." 

By  the  supernatural  object  which  is  estimated 

^  See  the  condemned  proposition  of  Innocent  XI  on  this 
point,  Denzinger-Bannwai't,  Enchiridion,  10th  ed.  (Frei- 
burg, 1908),  no.  1195. 

"c.  114,  C.  1.  q.  1. 


INTRODUCTION  5 

at  temporal  value,  we  understand  not  only  sancti- 
fying grace,  but  whatever  directly  procures  the 
eternal  welfare  of  the  soul,  e.  g.,  the  Sacraments, 
the  Sacramentals.  Moreover,  there  are  things 
which,  although  natural  in  themselves,  are,  when 
considered  in  the  concrete,  intimately  and  insepa- 
rably connected  with  the  supernatural,  such  as 
ecclesiastical  benefices  and  the  right  of  patronage. 
To  sell  them  is  simoniacal. 

Simony  as  thus  far  described  is  prohibited  by 
natural  and  positive  divine  law.  The  Church  in 
her  legislation  went  beyond  these  prohibitions,  and 
as  a  consequence  we  now  have  simony  of  mere 
ecclesiastical  law  (simonia  juris  ecclesiastici). 
For,  according  to  the  more  probable  theological 
opinion,  the  ecclesiastical  authority  has  the  right 
to  proscribe  as  simoniacal,  morally  indifferent  ac- 
tions, because  of  the  simoniacal  danger  which  they 
present.  In  this  manner,  the  exchange  of  an  ob- 
ject partly  supernatural  for  another  of  the  same 
nature  is  simoniacal  to-day,  as  is  also  any  arrange- 
ment respecting  the  same  things  entered  into  in 
a  way  contrary  to  the  canons  and  intended  to 
impose  reciprocal  obligations.  Thus,  to  cite  only 
one  instance,  the  exchange  of  one  benefice  for 
another  by  private  authority  is  simoniacal,  although 
it  is  a  transaction  in  things  of  the  same  character.'^ 

'  ce.  5  and  7.     De  Rerum  permutatione,  iii,  19. 


6  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

Both  natural  and  ecclesiastical  simony  may  be 
divided  into  mental,  conventional,  and  real  {simo- 
nia  mentalis,  conventionalism  et  realis).  Mental 
simony  is  characterized  either  by  the  absence  of  all 
outward  expression  or,  according  to  others,  by  the 
lack  of  approval  on  the  part  of  the  person  to  whom 
the  proposal  is  made.^  In  conventional  simony  an 
expressed  or  tacit  agreement  is  entered  upon.  It 
is  subdivided  into  merely  conventional,  where 
neither  party  has  fulfilled  any  of  the  terms  of  the 
agreement,  and  into  mixed  conventional,  in  which 
one  party  has  at  least  partly  complied  with  the 
assumed  obligations.  To  the  latter  subdivision 
may  be  referred  what  has  been  aptly  termed  con- 
fidential simony  (simonia  confidentialis) ,  in  which 
an  ecclesiastical  benefice  is  procured  for  a  certain 
person  with  the  agreement  that,  later  he  will  either 
resign  in  favor  of  the  one  who  procured  him  the 
benefice  or  divide  with  him  the  revenues.  When 
the  stipulations  of  the  mutual  agreement  have 
been  either  partly  or  completely  carried  out  by 
both  parties,  we  have  what  is  called  real  simony. 

If  we  now  inquire  into  the  gravity  of  the  simon- 
iacal  sin,  we  must  carefully  distinguish  between 
what  is  simoniacal  by  ll^atural  Law  and  what  has 

*  G^nicot,  Theologiae  moralis  Institutiones,  5th  ed.  (Lou- 
vain,  1905),  I,  265;  Santi-Leitner,  Praelectiones  Jims  Ca- 
nonici,  4th  ed.  (Ratisbon,  1905),  Lib.  V,  13-14.  His  treat- 
ment of  simony  runs  from  pp.   10-49, 


INTRODUCTION  7 

become  such  through  ecclesiastical  legislation.  If 
the  Natural  Law  and  consequently  the  positive 
Divine  Law  has  been  violated,  the  sin,  objectively 
considered,  is  mortal  in  every  instance  {mortalis 
ex  toto  genere  suo).  Only  the  absence  of  the  sub- 
jective dispositions  required  for  grievous  sin  can 
transform  the  transgression  into  a  venial  one. 
The  reason  for  this  is  found  in  the  existence  of 
a  sacrilegious  depreciation  of  things  pertaining 
to  the  supernatural  order.  Laws  merely  eccles- 
iastical bearing  on  this  point  do  not  all,  and  under 
all  circumstances,  impose  a  grave  obligation.  The 
presumption  is  that  the  church  authority  did  not 
intend  the  law  to  be  grievously  binding  in  small 
details.  An  ecclesiastical  prohibition  of  simony 
in  vigor  during  one  period  may  even  be  completely 
abolished  during  another.  It  is  certain  that  the 
ecclesiastic  may  accept  an  offering  for  his  spiritual 
ministrations  and  equally  as  certain  that  he  cannot 
accept  or  exact  anything  in  payment  for  them. 
But  as  far  as  the  minister  and  even  sacred  things 
are  concerned,  the  appearance  or  the  danger  of 
simony  may  or  may  not  exist  under  certain  given 
circumstances.  The  payment  of  pew-rent  cannot 
at  the  present  day  be  seriously  impugned  on  the 
ground  that  it  is  simoniacal.  Its  equivalent,  the 
payment  for  seats  at  the  church  door,  is  of  more 
objectionable  appearance  because  it  resembles  the 
payment   of   an   admission  fee.     It   may  not  be 


8  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

irrelevant  to  note  that  the  exaction  of  a  compul- 
sory contribution  at  the  church  entrance  from  the 
faithful  who  wish  to  hear  Mass  on  Sundays  and 
Holy  days  was  prohibited  by  the  second  ^  and 
third  ^°  Plenary  Councils  of  Baltimore  (1866, 
1884). 

Among  the  canonical  penalties  enacted  against 
simony,  the  following  may  be  mentioned: — The 
collation  of  a  benefice  is  void,  if,  in  obtaining  it, 
the  appointee  either  committed  simony  himself 
or,  at  least  tacitly  approved  of  its  commission  by 
a  third  party. ^"  Should  he  have  taken  possession, 
he  is  bound  to  resign  and  restore  all  the  revenues 
he  received  during  his  tenure.  ^^  Simply  reserved 
excommunication  is  pronounced  in  the  Constitu- 
tion "  Apostolicae  Sedis "  (October  12,  1869)  : 
1.  Against  persons  guilty  of  real  simony  in 
any  benefices  and  against  their  accomplices;  2. 
Against  any  persons,  whatsoever  their  dignity, 
guilty   of  confidential   simony   in   any  benefices; 

3.  Against  such  as  are  guilty  of  simony  because 
of  their  venal  admission  into  a  Religious  Order; 

4.  Against  all  persons  inferior  to  the  bishops,  who 

"  Decreta  Cone.  Plenarii  Bait.  II,  no.  397  (Baltimore, 
1868). 

"  Decreta  Cone.  Plenarii  Bait.  Ill,  no.  288  ( Baltimore, 
1886). 

"  Extrav.  c.  2,  v.  1.  Inter  communes,  De  Simonia;  c. 
23,  De  Simonia,  v,  3. 

^c.  50.     De  Elect,  i,  6. 


INTRODUCTION  9 

derive  gain  (quaestum  facientes)  from  indulgences 
and  other  spiritual  graces;  5.  Against  those  who 
collecting  stipends  for  Masses,  realize  a  profit  on 
them  by  having  the  Masses  celebrated  in  places 
where  smaller  stipends  are  usually  given. ^^  The 
last  mentioned  provision  was  supplemented  by  sub- 
sequent decrees  of  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  the 
Council.  The  decree  "  Vigilanti,"  ^^  of  the  25th 
of  May,  1893,  laid  booksellers  under  the  obliga- 
tion not  to  accept  Mass-stipends,  the  Masses  to 
be  assigned  to  priests  who  would  receive  payment 
only  in  books  or  in  subscriptions  to  periodicals. 
The  decree  "  Ut  Debita,"  ^^  published  on  the 
11th  of  May,  1904,  prohibited  the  arrangements 
sometimes  proposed  by  the  guardians  of  shrines, 
according  to  which  they  agree  to  apply  a  part  of 
the  offering  of  the  faithful  for  Masses  and  the 
remainder  for  other  pious  purposes.  The  penal- 
ties incurred  by  offenders  against  the  latter  enact- 
ments are:  a.  For  persons  in  Sacred  Orders,  sus- 
pension i2)so  facto  from  their  functions;  h.  Ina- 
bility to  receive  higher  orders  for  clerics  not  yet 
raised  to  the  priesthood ;  c.  Excommunication  of 
pronounced  sentence  (latae  sententiae)  for  laymen. 
In   thus    outlining   the   meaning   of   the   word 

^^  Apost.  Sedis,  ii  Class,  nos.  8-12. 
"  Acta  Sanctae  Sedis,  xxvi,  56-59. 

^Acta  S.  Sedis,  xxxvi,  672-76;  See  also  the  Letter  "  Re- 
eenti  Decreto"  of  the  22d  May,    1907,  ibid.  XL,  344-46. 


10  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

simony  at  the  present  day,  it  was  not  the  author's 
intention  to  lay  down  a  hard  and  fast  rule  which 
should  be  his  sole  guide  in  the  selection  of  the 
facts  and  laws  to  be  included  in  this  history.  As 
is  evident  from  what  has  already  been  said,  there 
are  two  distinct  elements  in  simony:  one  perma- 
nent, the  other  variable.  Some  actions  are  simoni- 
acal  in  themselves,  by  their  very  nature;  others 
become  so  in  consequence  of  ecclesiastical  prohi- 
bitions. The  Church  can  evidently  abrogate  laws 
which  she  has  framed  in  virtue  of  her  own  merely 
ecclesiastical  authority.  Historical  circumstances, 
social  conditions  and  public  opinion  may  change 
from  one  period  to  another.  As  a  result,  certain 
actions  and  practices  which  are  prohibited  at  one 
epoch  as  involving  a  danger  or  an  appearance  of 
simony,  may  become  perfectly  lawful  with  the 
change  in  time  and  environment  and  the  conse- 
quent modification  in  legislation. 

Such  variations  in  the  policy  of  the  Church,  far 
from  detracting  from  the  holiness  of  her  laws 
and  institutions,  are  but  proofs  of  her  vitality  and 
power  of  adaptability.  In  shaping  her  legislation 
concerning  simony  to  meet  the  needs  and  exigen- 
cies of  the  time,  she  judiciously  and  securely 
steered  her  course  between  two  apparently  con- 
flicting duties  devolving  upon  her:  the  necessity 
of  safeguarding  the  high  dignity  of  her  super- 
natural treasures  and  that  of  assuring  an  honest 


INTRODUCTION  11 

livelihood  to  her  ministers.  If,  therefore,  certain 
practices  obtain  at  the  present  day  which  in  former 
times  were  viewed  as  simoniacal  and  hence  pro- 
hibited, it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  their 
present  existence  is  open  to  censure.  The  recep- 
tion of  a  donation  by  the  sacred  minister  on 
occasion  of  the  performance  of  certain  ecclesiasti- 
cal functions  was  frequently  prohibited  during 
the  first  eight  centuries:  yet  it  cannot  be  claimed 
that  the  laws  then  enacted  in  this  regard  should 
be  enforced  indiscriminately  and  universally  in 
our  own  time.  Although  it  was  the  law  in  the 
early  ecclesiastical  history  of  Spain  not  to  accept 
any  emolument  at  the  administration  of  baptism, 
it  would  be  unjustifiable  to  censure  the  contrary 
practice  at  present  very  generally  prevalent. 
Likewise  the  enactments  prohibiting  the  accept- 
ance of  money  for  places  of  burial,  distribution 
of  holy  chrism  and  the  drawing  up  of  the  charters 
conferring  the  pallium  seem  to  have  fallen  into 
desuetude. 

Mention  is  also  made  of  some  events  and  laws 
which,  at  first  glance,  do  not  always  appear  to 
have  been  directly  connected  with  simony  even 
during  the  period  covered  by  the  work.  To  this 
class  may  perhaps  be  referred  the  payment  of  a 
sum  of  money  to  the  emperors  for  their  confirma- 
tion of  the  newly  elected  pope,  and  the  presentation 
of  gifts  to  kings  for  their  confirmation  of  bishops- 


12  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

elect.  But  the  practices  just  mentioned  certainly 
involved  a  danger  of  simony,  and  writers  con- 
temporary Avith  the  events  usually  speak  disap- 
provingly at  least  of  the  offer  of  presents  to  kings 
on  the  occasion  of  episcopal  appointments.  As  to 
legislation,  it  must  be  observed  that  some  enact- 
ments, though  not  anti-simoniacal  in  their  wording, 
nevertheless  indirectly  made  for  the  suppression 
of  simony  and  were  framed  with  a  view  to  its 
eradication.  Of  this  sort  was,  e.  g.,  the  law  pro- 
hibiting the  alienation  of  church  property.  It 
will  easily  be  perceived  how  this  law  operated, 
if  it  is  remembered  that  some  bishops  used  the 
funds  of  the  church  treasury  to  redeem  their 
promises  of  reward  to  those  who  had  supported 
their  candidacy.  Summing  up  these  remarks  re- 
specting the  treatment  of  the  subject,  we  may  say 
that  we  have  sometimes  included  in  this  study 
what  is  only  remotely  connected  with  simony,  but 
yet  facilitates  the  correct  appreciation  of  persons 
and  things  spoken  of  in  the  following  pages. 


CHAPTER  I 

SIMONY     FROM     THE     BEGINNING     OF     THE 

CHRISTIAN    ERA    TO    THE    EDICT 

OF   MILAN    (313) 

The  close  connection  between  the  supernatural  and  the 
natural  order  —  Simony  contrary  to  the  Natural  Law 
—  Judas  sells  Our  Lord  —  Existence  and  identification 
of  Simon  ]\Iagus  —  His  work  in  Samaria  and  his 
attempt  to  buy  the  Apostolic  power  —  The  condemna- 
tion of  simony  and  its  influence  on  subseqvient  times  — 
Other  causes  of  the  infrequency  of  simony  during  this 
period  —  Tertullian's  comparison  of  the  venality  of 
the  pagan  and  the  integrity  of  the  Christian  religion  — 
Eusebius'  description  of  the  state  of  the  Church  — 
Paul  of  Samosata  profits  by  his  episcopal  position  to 
enrich   himself  —  The   origin   of   Donatism. 

The  close  connection  existing  between  the  super- 
natural and  the  natural  order  and  the  consequent 
difficulty  of  drawing  a  line  of  demarcation  be- 
tween the  two,  was  a  cause  of  great  conflicts  in 
every  period  of  Ecclesiastical  History.  The  fail- 
ure of  the  state  authority  in  imperial  Rome  to 
distinguish  between  the  civil  and  the  ecclesiastical 
power  led  to  the  violent  persecutions  that  mark 
the  beginnings  of  Christianity.  Less  bloody  but 
not  less  bitter  conflicts  followed.  Even  after  their 
conversion  to  the  Christian  faith,  the  Roman  em- 

13 


14  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

perors,  conscious  of  the  great  civil  power  at  their 
command,  too  frequently  insisted  with  great  obsti- 
nacy upon  governing  not  only  the  empire,  but  also 
the  Church.  The  papal  bestowal  of  the  imperial 
title  on  Teutonic  rulers  (800)  led  eventually  to 
the  momentous  struggle  between  the  Papacy  and 
the  Empire,  which  opened  with  the  Investiture 
contest  and  ended  in  the  ruin  of  the  great  House 
of  the  Hohenstaufen.  Later  the  consolidation  of 
the  French  royal  power  brought  with  it  exorbitant 
pretensions  of  the  civil  authority  to  supremacy  in 
ecclesiastical  affairs.  Numerous  more  recent  ex- 
amples of  civil  prepotency  in  this  province,  it  is 
unnecessary  to  quote.  Under  various  forms  it  is 
the  problem  ever-recurring  and  practically  ever- 
unsolved,  of  the  relations  between  Church  and 
State.  These  relations  constitute  but  one  of  the 
issues  involved  in  the  great  question  of  the  intimate 
co-existence  of  the  temporal  and  the  spiritual 
order.  They  may  be  the  most  universal  and  im- 
portant part  of  the  question ;  they  are  not  the  only 
one.  That  difficulties  should  arise  on  this  point 
is  readily  understood;  this  emperor  or  that  king 
may  have  had  an  exaggerated  idea  of  his  exalted 
temporal  dignity  and  its  inherent  rights.  Such 
an  error,  when  followed  up  in  practice,  would 
naturally  beget  disastrous  religious  consequences. 
But  it  is  somewhat  surprising  to  behold  the 
Church  confronted  with  interior,   domestic  diffi- 


TO   THE   EDICT   OF   MILAN  15 

culties  arising  from  the  very  close  relation  between 
the  two  orders — ^the  natural  and  the  supernatural, 
especially  when  her  own  sacred  ministers  are  either 
sole  or  partial  agents.  The  latter,  however,  fre- 
quently either  deliberately  ignored  or  unwittingly 
overlooked  the  distinction  between  the  material 
or  temporal  and  the  spiritual.  That  some  of  the 
laity  quickly  followed  suit  is  easily  understood. 
The  material  traffic  in  supernatural  things,  at 
first  isolated,  then  sporadic  in  its  manifestation 
in  the  Christian  Church,  increased  by  degrees  to 
such  an  extent  and  became  so  widespread  and 
universal  that  simony  was  one  of  the  crying  evils, 
one  of  the  worst  abuses  that  ecclesiastical  au- 
thority had  to  contend  against.  Confining  our- 
selves to  the  ISTew  Testament,^  we  meet  it  at  the 
very  origin  of  the  Christian  religion,  and  that,  in 
spite  of  the  clearness  of  the  iJTatural  Law  itself 
on  this  point.  The  sinful  character  of  simony 
is  easily  perceived  by  unaided  human  reason. 
It  manifests  itself,  as  Thomas  Aquinas  -  has  clearly 
distinguished,  whether  we  consider  God,  the  ob- 
jects of  the  transaction,  or  the  transacting  parties. 
The  dignity  of  God  is  thereby  outraged;  and,  as 
the  Canon  Law  expresses  it,^  man  makes  the  Holy 

*For  the  Old  Test,  see  IV  Kings,  v.  20  seqq.     Exodus, 
XXIII,  8.     Numbers,  xxii,  7,   17,  37.     Mich,  in,  11. 
^  Summa  Theol.  ii,  iidae,  Quaest.  100,  Art.l. 
"c.  21,  C.  1.  Q.  1. 


16  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

Spirit  his  own  servant  and  disposes  of  Him.  A 
spiritual  object,  infinitely  superior  to  anything  tem- 
poral, is  estimated  at  a  material  or  at  least  transi- 
tory value.  It  was  this  reason  that  the  apostle 
Peter  cited  in  his  condemnation  of  Simon  Magus. 
As  to  the  transacting  parties,  the  seller  is  not  the 
possessor  of  the  spiritual  grace,  but  merely  an 
administrator,  a  dispenser,  a  distributor  of  trea- 
sures owned  or  favors  granted  by  another.  Hence 
he  cannot  sell  these  as  if  they  were  his  own 
property,  and  the  purchaser  cannot  acquire  them. 
The  Divine  Law,  as  expressed  in  the  ISTew  Testa- 
ment, is  but  a  re-statement,  without  any  addition, 
of  a  prohibition  wbich  can  be  known  by  our 
natural  faculties.  Human  Law,  both  ecclesiasti- 
cal and  civil,  anii^lified  and  extended  the  pro- 
hibition. Through  it,  some  intentions  or  actions 
became  simoniacal  because  they  were  forbidden; 
while,  according  to  Natural  and  Divine  Law,  some 
intentions  or  actions  were  forbidden  because  they 
were  simoniacal.  In  several  New  Testament 
passages,^  directions  are  written  down  for  the 
ministers  of  Christ,  regarding  the  possession  of 
earthly  goods  and  the  reception  of  temporal  re- 
wards. ISTone  of  the  texts  makes  any  substantial 
addition  to  the  content  of  that  of  Matthew,  which 
reads  as  follows  in  the  Douay  version :  "  Heal  the 

*Matth.  X,  8-10;   Mark,  vi,  8-11;   Luke,  ix,  3;   x,  4-12; 
XX,  35;   I  Cor.  IX,  4,  7-14;   I  Tim.  v,  17-18;   I  Pet.  V,  2. 


TO  THE   EDICT   OF   MILAN  17 

sick,  raise  the  dead,  cleanse  the  lepers,  cast  out 
devils ;  freely  have  you  received,  freely  give.  Do 
not  possess  gold,  nor  silver,  nor  money  in  your 
purses;  nor  scrip  for  your  journey,  nor  two  coats, 
nor  shoes,  nor  a  staff ;  for  the  workman  is  worthy 
of  his  meat." 

It  has  been  said,^  with  some  truth,  that  in  the 
first  instance  of  simony  which  we  meet  in  the 
Christian  Church,  one  of  its  perpetrators  was  a 
member  of  the  Apostolic  College.  Judas  ^  sold  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Author  of  the  spiritual 
life.  But  the  crime  bore  such  an  exceptional  and 
repulsive  character;  its  consequences  were  so 
tragic  and  appalling,  that  the  apparently  simoni- 
acal  feature  of  the  act  became  secondary  in  men's 
minds  and  rightly  received  but  scant  mention  in 
history.  The  origin  and  name  of  the  evil  in  the 
Church  is  connected  with  Simon  Magus,  a  person- 
age whose  history  has  been  greatly  obscured. 
According  to  the  system  excogitated  by  the  Tii- 
bingen  School  and  defended  to-day  in  at  least  a 
modified  form  by  P.  W.  Schmiedel  "^  and  others,^ 
Simon  Magus  was  merely  a  name  of  reproach 
applied  to  the  apostle  Paul,  and  the  opposition 
between  Peter  and  Simon  only  a  phase  of  Petrine 

^Leinz,  Die  Simonie,  1.         ^Matth.  xxvi,  14-16,  47-51. 

'  Cheyne  and  Black,  Encycl.  Bibl.  iv,  4536-60  (London, 
1903). 

*  See  Hans  Waitz,  in  Realenc.  f.  prot.  Theol.  3d  ed.  s.  v. 
Simon   der   Magier. 
2 


18  A    HISTOEY    OF    SIMONY 

and  Pauline  antagonism.  The  older  representa- 
tives of  the  School  went  so  far  as  to  deny  the 
historical  reality  of  Simon.  A.  Hilgenfeld,  (who 
later  admitted  Simon  to  be  an  historical  personage 
different  from  Paul),  claimed  the  parentage  of 
the  startling  discovery.^  However,  ingenious  and 
bold  hypotheses,  cannot  remove  extant  historical 
evidences.  That  much  of  the  early  Christian  litera- 
ture regarding  Simon  Magus  is  apocryphal  we 
may  admit  without  conceding  that  wherever 
Simon's  name  occurs,  we  ought  to  read  that  of 
Paul.  Nor  does  it  seem  justifiable  to  identify 
the  Simon  mentioned  by  Josephus  ^^  who  was  a 
native  of  Cyprus  with  his  notorious  namesake  of 
early  Christian  literature.  Yet  this  identification 
was  attempted  very  recently  by  Mgr.  Le  Camus.  ■'^ 
The  words  of  Justin  Martyr  are  so  emphatic  ^^ 
that  they  force  us  to  regard  Gitton,  a  town  of 
Samaria,  as  the  birth-place  of  Simon  Magus. 
Justin,  himself  a  native  of  Samaria,  in  the  genera- 
tion that  followed  Simon's  death,  must  have  been 
well  informed  and  would  not  have  repeatedly  ^^ 
placed  such  a  celebrity  before  us  as  one  of  his 
own  countrymen  unless  the  fact  were  universally 

^  Der  Magier  Simon,  Zeitsch.  f.  Wiss.  Theol.   (1868),  357- 
396,  with  references  given  there. 
^"  Antiq.  xx,  vii,  2. 

^^ L'Oeuvre   des   Apotres,   i,    152    (Paris,    1905). 
'^  Apolog.  I,  c.  26. 
"  Apolog.  I,  c.  56;  Apolog.  ii,  c.  15. 


TO   THE   EDICT   OF   MILAN  I9 

admitted.  The  prevalence  of  this  name  among 
the  Jews  and  the  appearance  of  a  large  number 
of  magicians  at  this  very  time  account  satisfac- 
torily for  the  simultaneous  existence  of  two 
Simons,  both  magicians.  At  all  events,  reliable 
ante-l^icene  ecclesiastical  writers,  posterior  to 
Justin,  invariably  speak  of  Simon  as  a  Samari- 
tan.^^ ISTothing  trustworthy  is  known  regarding 
his  early  life.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  give  us 
the  first  details  of  his  extraordinary  public  career. 
We  read:  ^^ 

"  And  Philip  going  down  to  the  city  of  Samaria, 
preached  Christ  unto  them.  And  the  people  with 
one  accord  were  attentive  to  those  things  which  were 
said  by  Philip,  hearing,  and  seeing  the  miracles  which 
he  did.  For  many  of  them  who  had  unclean  spirits, 
crying  with  a  loud  voice,  went  out.  And  many,  taken 
with  the  palsy,  and  that  were  lame,  were  healed. 
There  was  therefore  great  joy  in  that  city.  Now  there 
was  a  certain  man  named  Simon,  who  before  had  been 
a   magician   in   that   city,    seducing   the   people   of 

"  For  the  history  of  Simon,  see  Justin,  Dial.  c.  Tryph. 
n.  120;  Irenaeus,  Adv.  Haereses,  Lib.  i,  c.  23;  11,  cc.  9, 
31;  IV,  6;  TertuU.  De  Anima,  c.  34;  Origen,  Contra  Celsum, 
VI,  c.  11;  Hippol.  Philosophumena,  vi,  2;  Euseb.  Hist. 
Ecc.  n,  3;  Hegesipp.  in  Euseb.  I.  c.  iv,  22.  The  Clementine 
Homilies  and  Recognitions  and  other  apocryphal  writings 
contain  frequent  references  to  Simon.  See  Lipsius,  Die 
Apokr.  Apostelgesch.  u.  Apostellegenden  (Brunswick,  1883- 
90),  in  index  s.  v.  Simon  Magus. 

^Acts,  vui,  5-25. 


20  A   HISTOEY    OF    SIMONY 

Samaria,  giving  out  that  he  was  some  great  one: 
to  whom  they  all  gave  ear,  from  the  least  to  the 
greatest,  saying:  This  man  is  the  power  of  God, 
which  is  called  great.  And  they  were  attentive  to 
him,  because,  for  a  long  time,  he  had  bewitched  them 
with  his  magical  practices.  But  when  they  had  be- 
lieved Philip  preaching  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  in 
the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  were  baptized,  both 
men  and  women.  Then  Simon  himself  believed  also ; 
and  being  baptized,  he  adliered  to  Philip.  And  being 
astonished,  wondered  to  see  the  signs  and  exceeding 
great  miracles  which  were  done.  Now  when  the 
apostles,  who  were  in  Jerusalem,  had  heard  that 
Samaria  had  received  the  word  of  God,  they  sent 
unto  them  Peter  and  John.  Wlio,  when  they  were 
come,  prayed  for  them,  that  they  might  receive  the 
Holy  Ghost.  For  he  was  not  as  yet  come  upon  any 
of  them;  but  they  were  only  baptized  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord  Jesus.  Then  they  laid  their  hands  upon 
them,  and  they  received  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  when 
Simon  saw,  that  by  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of 
the  apostles,  the  Holy  Ghost  was  given,  he  offered 
them  money,  saying:  Give  me  also  this  power,  that 
on  whomsoever  I  shall  lay  my  hands,  he  may  receive 
the  Holy  Ghost.  But  Peter  said  to  him:  Keep  thy 
money  to  thyself,  to  perish  with  thee,  because  thou 
hast  thought  that  the  gift  of  God  may  be  purchased 
with  money.  Thou  hast  no  part  nor  lot  in  this 
matter.  For  thy  heart  is  not  right  in  the  sight  of 
God.  Do  penance  therefore  for  this  thy  wickedness; 
and  pray  to  God,  that  perhaps  this  thought  of  thy 
heart  may  be  forgiven  thee.     For  I  see  thou  art  in  the 


TO  THE   EDICT   OF   MILAN  21 

gall  of  bitterness,  and  in  the  bonds  of  iniquity. 
Then  Simon  answering,  said :  Pray  you  for  me  to  the 
Lord,  that  none  of  these  things  which  you  have 
spoken  may  come  upon  me."  ^® 

Simon  had  therefore  been  displaying  his  power 
for  some  time  in  Samaria,  when  the  deacon  Philip 
came  there  to  preach  the  gospel.  His  magical 
arts  had  procured  him  a  numerous  following. 
The  miraculous  works  of  Philip,  however,  com- 
pletely destroyed  his  influence  over  the  people. 
Simon  himself  was  converted  and  received  bap- 
tism. Whatever  may  be  held  of  the  sincerity  of 
his  conversion,  it  would  appear  that  he  was  more 
impressed  by  exterior  signs,  present  and  tangible 
things,  than  by  the  thought  of  the  interior  dis- 
positions which  must  accompany  the  true  pro- 
fession of  Christianity.  For  we  read  that  Simon 
"  being  astonished,  wondered  to  see  the  signs  and 
exceeding  great  miracles  which  were  done."  And 
again  the  Apostle  says :  "  For  thy  heart  is  not 
right  in  the  sight  of  God."  The  magician's 
answer  to  Peter :  "  Pray  you  for  me  to  the  Lord, 
that  none  of  these  things  which  you  have  spoken 
may  come  upon  me,"  bespeaks  fear,  not  penitence. 
Simon   merely   wishes   to   avoid   the   punishment 

"A  detailed  but  now  somewhat  antiquated  discussion 
of  the  passage  just  cited  will  be  found  in  Ketwieh,  De 
Simonia,  5-29.     (Leyden,  1845.) 


22  A   HISTORY   OF    SIMONY 

which  he  has  incurred.  Perhaps  this  lack  of  in- 
terior dispositions  also  accounts  for  the  doubting 
clause  in  the  words  of  Peter :  "  Pray  to  God,  that 
perhaps  this  thought  of  thy  heart  may  be  forgiven 
thee."  It  was  his  great  appreciation  of  extra- 
ordinary powers  and  of  the  advantages  he  might 
derive  from  their  possession  that  prompted  the 
magician  to  offer  money  for  "  the  gift  of  God." 
All  this  explains  why  the  severe  denunciation  of 
Peter  overlooks  the  exterior  attempt  and  speaks 
only  of  the  intention,  "  the  thought,  the  heart " : 
"  Because  thou  hast  thought  that  the  gift  of  God 
may  be  purchased  with  money." 

This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss  the  theological 
system  of  Simon.  Varied  indeed  has  been  its 
exposition  by  ancient  Christian  writers.  Amid 
their  many  conflicting  statements  one  thing  is 
certain,  namely,  that  the  magician  claimed  for 
himself  divine  power.  He  became  the  founder 
of  the  heretical  sect  of  the  Simonians  which  was 
still  flourishing  in  the  second  century.  Christian 
antiquity  and  the  Middle  Ages  looked  upon  him 
as  the  father  of  heresy ;  in  the  latter  period  simony 
was  frequently  denounced  as  heresy,  among  other 
reasons,  as  Kranzf elder  ^'^  rightly  observes,  for  the 
purpose  of  inspiring  a  horror  of  this  sin. 

In  the  days  of  the  emperor  Claudius  (a.  d.  41- 

"  Gregorius   des   Grossen  ausgewdhlte   Brief e    (Kempten, 
1874),  95,  note   1. 


TO   THE   EDICT   OF   MILAN  23 

54)  Simon,  according  to  Justin/^  came  to  Rome, 
where  divine  honors  were  paid  him.  A  statue 
was  erected  to  him  on  the  Tiber  Island  and  dedi- 
cated to  the  "god  Simon"  (Simoni  deo  Sando). 
The  statement  regarding  Simon's  presence  in 
Rome  is  probably  the  expression  of  a  tradition 
current  in  the  Roman  community  in  Justin's  time 
and  can  therefore  hardly  be  rejected.  As  to  the 
allegation  that  a  statue  Avas  raised  to  Simon,  it 
is  probably  based  on  an  error.  In  the  year  1574 
there  was  dug  up  in  the  very  place  indicated  by 
Justin  as  the  site  of  this  monument,  the  base  of 
a  statue  bearing  the  inscription :  "  Semoni  Sanco 
Deo."  ^Now  Semo  Sancus  was  a  Sabine  god. 
While  it  cannot  be  proved  with  absolute  certainty 
that  Justin  erroneously  referred  these  very  words 
to  Simon  the  Magician,  most  scholars  are  inclined 
to  discard  his  testimony  in  this  matter  and  to 
identify  the  two  inscriptions. 

There  is  no  trace  in  the  earliest  writers,  such 
as  Hegesippus,  Justin  and  Irenaeus,  of  the  tra- 
dition that  Peter  met  Simon  at  Rome  and  there 
withstood  him.  ISTor  can  any  credence  be  placed 
in  the  fabulous  accounts  which  narrate  the  time, 
place  and  other  circumstances  of  Simon's  death. ^® 

"  II.  CC. 

"  See  Lipsius,  De  Apokryph.  Apostelgesch.  II,  i,  66  seqq. ; 
ibid.  33  seqq.  and  passim;  Salmon  in  Diet.  Christ.  Biog. 
s.  V.  Simon  Magus;  Waitz,  in  Realenc.  f.  Prot.  Theol. 
3d  ed.  s.  V.  Simon  der  Magier. 


24  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

After  Simon,  but  few  instances  of  simony  are 
recorded  in  pre-Constantinian  times.  All  of  them 
may  not  be  known  to  us,  owing  to  the  incomplete 
and  fragmentary  character  of  our  documents  per- 
taining to  this  period.  But  judging  from  histo- 
rical circumstances,  the  evil  did  not  and  could  not 
assume  large  proportions.  The  attempt  of  Simon 
Magus,  so  clear  and  unmistakable  in  its  mani- 
festation and  so  mercilessly  condemned  by  Peter, 
made  a  vivid  impression  on  the  succeeding  Chris- 
tian generations.  That  its  restraining  influence 
was  of  a  far-reaching  nature,  is  evident  from  the 
great  notoriety  the  incident  received.  Union  be- 
tween Church  and  State,  at  a  later  date  frequently 
the  cause  of  simoniacal  transgressions,  did  not 
exist.  The  relations  between  the  two  powers  were 
hardly  ever  friendly,  generally  either  indifferent 
or  hostile.  ]^o  civil  privileges  were  connected 
with  ecclesiastical  dignities.  The  hostility  of  the 
state  frequently  manifested  itself  in  physical  vio- 
lence against  the  Christians,  and  first  and  fore- 
most against  the  clergy,  among  whom,  owing  to 
their  station,  the  traffic  in  spiritual  things  is  more 
apt  to  take  place.  Ecclesiastical  positions  were 
posts  of  danger  and  self-sacrifice  rather  than  of 
ease  and  honor.  They  were  little  sought  after  by 
persons  in  quest  of  worldly  consideration  and  lu- 
crative places.  The  bishops  and  the  other  eccle- 
siastical ministers  had  too  high  a  sense  of  their 


TO  THE  EDICT   OF  MILAN  25 

responsibilities,  of  the  exemplary  personal  sanctity 
required  of  them  to  engage  in  simoniacal  practices. 
Enormous  and  oft-repeated  were  the  charges 
brought  against  the  Christians  by  both  Pagans  and 
Jews.  Heretics  were  prompt  in  noting  and  stig- 
matizing their  alleged  contraventions  to  the  law 
of  Christ.  But  never  do  any  of  them  so  much  as 
hint  at  the  sin  of  simony.  Tertullian  contrasts 
the  venality  of  the  Pagan  religion  with  the  integ- 
rity of  the  Christian.-^  The  very  gods  are  for 
sale  in  heathenism;  their  worshippers  sell  them 
and,  in  return,  no  one  is  admitted  to  the  knowledge 
of  the  gods  free  of  charge.  "  Non  licet  deos  nosse 
gratis:  venales  sunt/'  A  fee  is  exacted  for  room 
in  the  temple,  for  the  very  admittance  thereto. 
Different  is  the  religion  of  the  Christians;  we 
read: 

"  All  the  Elders,  our  rulers,  are  men  of  demon- 
strated character,  who  have  obtained  that  honor 
not  by  money  but  by  election.  ISTo  market-value 
is  set  upon  anything  in  our  religion.  We  have 
indeed  boxes  for  offerings;  ....  contributions, 
however,  are  not  compulsory,  but  spontaneous."  ^^ 

However,  ruled  by  men  and  dealing  with  men, 
the  Church  had  ever  the  source  of  simony  within 
herself.  Ambition  and  the  love  of  wealth  and 
ease,  are  to  be  met  with  in  every  human  heart  and 

'^Apologetic,  c.  xiii. 

'^  Apolog.  e.  xxxix.     Cfr.  also  Justin,  Apolog.  i,  e.  67. 


26  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

are  bound  to  manifest  themselves  in  any  great  and 
durable  human  organization,  however  lofty  its 
principles  and  end.  We  learn  from  Eusebius  that 
even  during  the  first  three  centuries  of  its  ex- 
istence, harmony  and  disinterestedness  were  not 
universally  practiced  by  the  Christian  community. 
In  speaking  of  the  period  immediately  preceding 
the  Diocletian  persecution,  he  writes,  with  some 
exaggeration,  however :  "  But  when  on  account  of 
the  abundant  freedom,  we  fell  into  laxity  and 
sloth,  and  envied  and  reviled  each  other,  and  were 
almost,  as  it  were,  taking  up  arms  against  one 
another,  rulers  assailing  rulers,  with  words  like 
spears,  and  people  forming  parties  against  people, 
and  monstrous  hypocrisy  and  dissimulation  rising 
to  the  greatest  height  of  wickedness,  the  divine 
judgment  with  forbearance,  as  is  its  pleasure, 
while  the  multitudes  yet  continued  to  assemble, 
gently  and  moderately  harassed  the  episcopacy. 
This  persecution  began  with  the  brethren  in  the 
army.  But  as  if  without  sensibility,  we  were  not 
eager  to  make  the  Deity  favorable  and  propitious ; 
and  some,  like  atheists,  thought  that  our  affairs 
were  unheeded  and  ungoverned;  and  thus  we 
added  one  wickedness  to  another.  And  those 
esteemed  our  shepherds  casting  aside  the  bond  of 
piety,  were  excited  to  conflicts  with  one  another, 
and  did  nothing  else  than  heap  up  strifes  and 
threats  and  jealousy  and  enmity  and  hatred  to- 


TO   THE   EDICT   OF   MILAN  27 

ward  each  other,  like  tyrants  eagerly  endeavoring 
to  assert  their  power."  ^^ 

Shortly  before  the  time  to  which  these  words 
refer,  a  charge  of  simoniacal  dealings  was  brought 
against  the  famous  Paul  of  Samosata,  bishop  of 
Antioch  (c.  260-72),  by  the  council  that  pro- 
nounced his  condemnation  (c.  268).  The  passage 
of  the  condemnatory  encyclical  letter  which  refers 
to  him,  is  reproduced  by  Eusebius  ^^  and  reads 
as  follows :  "  Whereas  he  has  abandoned  the  rule 
of  faith,  and  has  turned  aside  after  base  and  false 
doctrines,  there  is  no  necessity  of  judging  his  con- 
duct, since  he  is  outside  the  Church.  We  need  not 
speak  of  the  fact  that  he  who  was  formerly  in 
poverty  and  destitution  and  who  had  received  no 
wealth  from  his  fathers,  nor  made  anything  by 
trade  or  business,  has  now  arrived  at  excessive 
wealth  by  his  iniquities  and  sacrileges  and  his 
extortions  from  the  brethren;  that  he  deprives 
the  injured  of  their  rights,  and  promises  them 
assistance  for  remuneration,  yet  deceives  them  and 
plunders  those  who,  in  their  trouble,  are  ready 
with  their  gifts  so  as  to  obtain  reconciliation  with 

^Hist.  Ecc.  yui,  1.  Griechische  Christl.  Schriftsteller, 
Eusebius,  II,  ii,  738,  ed.  Schwartz  and  Mommsen  (Leipzig, 
1908 ) .  The  Eng.  translation  is  that  of  McGifFert  in  vol.  i 
of  the  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers  (2d  ser.),  ed.  by 
Schaff  and  Wace    (New  York,  1904). 

=^Euseb.  H.  E.,  vii,  30. 


28  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

their  oppressors.  We  shall  say  nothing  of  his 
making  merchandise  of  piety."  ^* 

As  is  seen,  the  document  does  not  cite  any 
specific  facts,  but  it  gives  us  clearly  to  understand 
that  Paul  freely  and  extensively  used  his  spiritual 
office  to  enrich  himself. 

Bribery  is  found  at  the  origin  of  the  Donatist 
schism.  At  the  death  of  Mensurius  (311),  Ce- 
cilian,  his  archdeacon,  had  been  elected  bishop  of 
Carthage  by  the  majority,  but  was  rejected  by  the 
seventy  ISTumidian  bishops,  under  the  leadership 
of  Secundus  of  Tigisis.-^  The  votes  of  these  same 
bishops,  cast  for  Majorinus,  were  bought  by  the 
wealthy  Lucilla.^®  It  is  said  that  a  well-merited 
public  rebuke,  which  she  had  incurred  in  conse- 
quence of  extravagant  veneration  for  relics  of 
saints,  had  irritated  Lucilla  against  Cecilian,  who 
had  administered  the  reprimand  while  still  an 
archdeacon.  When  he  was  elected  bishop,  the 
choice  was  not  agreeable  to  her.  Using  her  wealth 
and  influence,  she  succeeded  in  having  a  member 
of  her  own  household,  Majorinus  (d.  c.  315), 
elected,  paying  the  bishops  400  "  folles  "  for  the 

**  Allusion  to  Paul,  I  Tim.  vi,  5. 

=»Aug.   De   Unitate  Eccl.  PL.  43,  426. 

^Aug.  Ep.  43,  17,  Corp.  Scrip.  Eccl.  Lat.  xxxiiii,  Aug. 
Epp.  II,  98-99,  ed.  Goldbacher.  Cfr.  also  PL.  43,  443. 
Optat.  of  Milev.  De  Schism.  Donat.  in  Corp.  Scrip,  etc. 
XXVI,  21,  ed.  C.  Ziwsa. 


TO   THE   EDICT   OF   MILAN  29 

counter-election.^''^  In  indicating  this  sum,  Au- 
gustine gives  us  the  text  of  the  official  report  of 
the  Zenophilian  investigation,  which  was  still  ex- 
tant in  his  time,  but  is  now  partly  lost.  The 
short  extract  of  the  report,  which  he  transcribes,"^ 
and  the  more  extensive  fragment  which  has  reached 
us  otherwise,^^  mention  also  the  offence  of  a  cer- 
tain Victor,  a  fuller,  who  paid  20  "  folles "  to 
Silvanus,  bishop  of  Cirta,  for  his  consecration  to 
the  priesthood.  It  seems  to  be  impossible,  in  the 
present  state  of  our  knowledge,  to  state  with  cer- 
tainty, the  monetary  value  of  these  sums  of 
"  folles."  The  word  originally  meant  purse  and 
was  later  applied  also  to  the  contents  of  the  same. 
The  "  follis "  was  used  in  reckoning  gold  and 
silver  as  well  as  copper.  As  in  the  present  in- 
stance we  do  not  know  the  nature  of  the  metal 
of  which  there  is  question,  the  value  of  the  sum 
itself  must  remain  in  doubt.  ^° 


"Aug.  Contra  Cresc.  m,  28,  29.     PL.  43,  512-14. 

^PL.  43,  514. 

^  Qesta  ap.  Zenophilum,  Corp.  Scrip,  etc.  xxvi,  185-97, 
ed.  Ziwsa. 

""  On  the  "  follis  "  see  Marquardt,  Rom.  Staatsverwaltung, 
n,  43  seqq.  2d  ed.  (Leipzig,  1884).  Diet,  of  Christian 
Biog.  8.  V.  Lucilla;  Delmar,  History  of  Monetary  Systems, 
94  seqq. — On  the  origin  of  Donatism  see  Voelter,  Der 
TJr sprung  des  Donatismus  (Freiburg,  1883);  Duchesne, 
Le  Dossier  du  Donatisme  (Rome,  1890) ;  Harnack,  Alt- 
Christ.  Litt.  i,  744-51    (Leipzig,  1893). 


CHAPTER  II 

PREVALENCE    OF    SIMONY    FROM   THE   YEAR 
313  TO  476 

Ecclesiastical,  judicial  and  civil  power  of  the  bishops  — 
Their  election  —  Simony  among  the  Arians  — Simony 
among  Catholics  —  Gregory  Nazianzen  and  Maximus  the 
Cynic  —  Chrysostom  and  the  accusations  against  Anto- 
ninus of  Ephesus  —  A  synod  of  Ephesus  and  six  si- 
moniacal  bishops  —  Chrysostom  deposes  Gerontius  — 
Isidore  of  Pelusium  and  simony  —  Flavian  of  Con- 
stantinople and  Chrysaphius  —  Ibas  of  Edessa  accused 
of  simony  —  Timothy  Ailuros  at  Alexandria  —  Simony 
in  Gaul ;  episcopal  election  at  Chalon-sur-Saone  — 
Election  at  Bourges. 

With  tlie  publication  of  the  edict  of  Milan 
(313),  a  new  era  opened  for  the  Christian  Church. 
Constantine  and  Licinius  granted  freedom  to  its 
hitherto  persecuted  members.  The  pagan  religion, 
in  its  turn,  soon  became  an  object  of  repression, 
while  an  ever-increasing  number  of  favors  was 
lavished  upon  the  Church  of  Christ.  Its  bishops 
began  to  exercise  not  only  ecclesiastical,  but  also 
considerable  civil  power  in  the  community;  a 
power  which  they  held  for  many  subsequent 
centuries. 

IsTumerous  and  important  conversions  were  the 
natural  result  of  the  cessation  of  persecution,  and 
30 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313   TO   476  31 

it  is  obvious  that  this  meant  a  proportionate  in- 
crease in  the  ecclesiastical  authority  of  the  bishop. 
Through  the  restitution  of  its  property  confiscated 
in  the  time  of  persecution,  and  through  frequent 
and  substantial  donations,  made  possible  by  the 
civil  recognition  of  the  Church  as  a  corporation 
and  her  right  to  inherit  and  acquire,  the  Church 
became  eventually  very  rich.  The  ecclesiastical 
revenues  were  used  to  support  the  clergy,  to  defray 
the  expenses  of  public  worship  and  to  help  the 
needy  and  poor.  The  administration  of  all  church 
possessions  was,  with  little  superior  control,  in 
the  hands  of  the  local  bishop.  Ecclesiastical  con- 
cerns of  a  litigious  nature  could  be  brought  before 
the  bishop's  tribunal  for  adjudication.  As  early  as 
397  the  third  council  of  Carthage  (can.  9)  obliged 
all  clerics  to  submit  their  grievances  to  an  eccle- 
siastical court.  Other  councils  took  up  the  same 
question;  and  Justinian  finally  decreed  that  law- 
suits between  clerics  and  laymen,  as  well  as  mere 
ecclesiastical  cases,  were  to  be  settled  by  church 
authorities.^  In  the  West  the  judicial  privileges 
granted  to  the  clergy  by  the  Erankish  Kings  were 
less  extensive  and  conceded  with  more  caution; 
complete  independence  of  the  civil  courts,  however, 
was  the  rule  in  the  later  Middle  Ages.  The  civil 
cases  of  laymen  also  were  submitted  at  an  early 
date  to  the  decision  of  the  bishops,  whose  authority 

^Nov.   79;    83;    123,   c.   8,   21,   22. 


32  A    HISTOEY    OF    SIMONY 

over  such  matters  was  recognized  by  Constantine 
the  Great  in  331;  indeed,  until  the  fall  of  the 
Roman  empire  at  the  end  of  the  fifth  century, 
persons  in  every  walk  of  life  were  content  to  have 
their  disputes  settled  in  this  manner. 

In  their  relations  with  the  central  government, 
the  ancient  Roman  municipalities,  East  and  West, 
usually  considered  the  bishops  as  the  best  repre- 
sentatives of  their  interests.  The  "  defensor  civi- 
tatis "  was,  indeed,  the  especially  appointed 
official,  upon  whom  the  duty  of  this  representation 
devolved.  He  it  was  who  defended  local  interests 
in  such  matters  as  the  imposition  of  taxes.  But 
the  confidence  of  each  city  in  the  ability  and  in- 
fluence of  its  bishop  soon  increased  to  such  an 
extent  that  he  became  the  city's  real  advocate, 
while  the  lay  "  defensor  "  was  but  his  lieutenant. 
Indeed,  there  was  hardly  a  municipal  office  which 
did  not,  in  a  certain  measure,  depend  upon  the 
bishop.  It  is  not  difficult,  therefore,  to  realize 
how  great  was  the  influence  exercised  over  the 
whole  life  of  the  city  by  a  man  who  was  not  only 
the  spiritual  guide,  but  the  dispenser  of  all  works 
of  charity,  a  judge  and,  in  fact,  a  civil  magistrate. 
Under  these  circumstances,  it  is  not  surprising 
to  find  that  some  aspired  to  the  episcopacy  more 
out  of  a  desire  to  enjoy  the  power  and  honors 
which  it  conferred  than  because  of  its  spiritual 
advantages.     Jerome  relates  that  the  consul-elect 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313   TO   476  33 

Praetextatus  used  to  remark  jestingly  to  Pope 
Damasus :  "  Make  me  bishop  of  Rome  and  I  will 
forthwith  become  a  Christian."  -  And  Ammi- 
anus  Marcellinus  wi'ites :  "  The  one  who  is  raised 
to  that  position  enjoys  in  peace  a  fortune  guaran- 
teed by  the  generosity  of  the  matrons;  he  goes 
out  driving  seated  in  a  carriage  and  dressed  in 
sumptuous  garments  and  in  his  entertainments  sur- 
passes the  profusion  of  royal  banquets.^ 

The  necessity  of  approbation  by  the  popular 
electorate  was  not  by  any  means  an  insurmount- 
able obstacle  in  the  way  of  ambitious  episcopal 
candidates.  A  movement  in  their  favor  would  be 
inaugurated  by  a  lavish  distribution  of  gifts,  gen- 
erous promises,  by  threats  and  even  vexatious 
measures.  The  mode  of  election  by  acclamation 
favored  surreptitious  methods.  There  was  no  re- 
quirement of  a  very  precise  number  of  votes.  The 
designation  made  by  one  person  could  readily  be 
concurred  in  by  several  others  and  secure  the 
position  to  an  interestedly  generous  but  not  very 
ecclesiastically-minded  candidate.  The  confirma- 
tion of  the  bishops  by  the  civil  power,  which 
in  the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries  often  degen- 
erated into  a  nomination,  was  also,  as  will  be 
seen,  a  prolific  source  of  abuse.^ 

="  Contra  Joh.  Hier.  8.     PL.  23,  361. 

^Ammian.  Marcell.  xxvii,  3,  14,  ed.  Gardthausen   (Leip- 
zig,   1874-75),   II,    100. 

*  On  the  power  of  the  bishops  see  De  Broglie,  L'Eglise 

3 


34  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

Shortly  before  tbeArian  troubles  began  seriously 
to  disturb  the  church  of  Alexandria,  a  certain 
Colluthus  had  already  acquired  unpleasant  noto- 
riety in  the  city.  The  local  bishop  Alexander,  in 
a  letter  preserved  to  us  by  Theodoret,^  speaks 
of  his  "  lYPto-Te/LtTTopeta,"  which  Valesius  takes  to 
mean  the  acceptance  of  money  for  ordinations.^ 
This  interpretation  is  probably  correct.  The 
Greek  word,  however,  admits  of  a  wider  inter- 
pretation and  does  not  necessarily  refer  to  strictly 
simoniacal  dealings.  It  merely  implies,  in  a 
general  way,  the  derivation  of  temporal  advan- 
tage from  spiritual  things. ''^  As  to  Arianism 
itself,  it  seems  to  have  owed  its  success  partly  to 
pecuniary  influences.  'Not  only  did  it  curry  favor 
with  the  emperors  and  thus  gain  adherents;  but 
money  is  specifically  mentioned  as  a  powerful 
proselytizing  factor.  Athanasius  says  of  the  fol- 
lowers of  Arius :  "  Where  did  these  flatterers  and 


et  I'Empire  Romain  au  IVe  si^cle  (Paris,  1856-66),  passim, 
esp.  VI,  457-62;  Diehl,  Etudes  sur  l' administration  Byzan- 
tine (Paris,  1888),  319  seqq.;  Loening,  Gesch.  des  deutsch. 
Kirchenr.  i,  103  seqq.  314  seqq.  ii,  220  seqq.;  Prou,  La 
Gaule  Merov.  105-49;  Fustel  de  Coulanges,  La  MonarcMe 
Franque,  2d  ed.    (Paris,   1905),  566  seqq. 

^  Hist.  Eccl.  I,  3,  al,  4,  PG.  82,  889. 

^ Hist.  Eccl.  Scrip,  re-ed.  by  G.  Reading  (Cambridge, 
1720),  III,  9,  note  5. 

'See  Didache,  c.  12,  ed.  Funk  (Tubingen,  1887),  40  with 
note   5. 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313    TO   476  35 

bribers  of  the  heresy  learn  these  things  ?  "  ^  A 
little  further,  he  speaks  of  the  support  they  re- 
ceived from  their  friends,^  and  in  the  fifty-third 
chapter  of  the  same  discourse  he  refers  with 
special  emphasis  to  their  love  of  gain.^*^  In  his 
statements  concerning  the  appointment  of  Arian 
bishojDs,  his  accusations  become  more  definite.  In 
certain  instances  the  episcopal  dignity  was,  so  to 
speak,  sold  at  auction,  for  some  men,  who  were 
rather  disreputable  in  character,  owed  their  ap- 
pointment solely  to  their  wealth  and  their  great 
influence  in  the  community.  ^^  He  makes  a  simi- 
lar charge  against  the  Meletian  bishops,  who, 
through  bribery,  obtained  the  episcopal  ofiice  even 
before  being  instructed  in  the  Christian  religion. 
That  they  should  readily  pass  over  to  the  Arians, 
is  not  then  surprising.^"  In  his  Apology  to  Con- 
stantino,^^ Athanasius  even  tells  us  that  the  Arians 
considered  it  of  no  consequence  whether  the  epis- 
copal candidate  was  a  pagan  or  not,  as  long  as  he 
paid  for  his  preferment.  True,  Athanasius  else- 
where ^"^  contrasts  the  avaricious  Meletians  with 
the  merely  impious  Arians;  but  this  may  be  ex- 

^Orat.  I.  c.  Arian.  PG.  26,  28.     "Oi  KoXaws  ko2  dupoSUol 
TTJs  aipiffem.''     See  also  PG.  25,  769. 
^PG.  26,  32,  see  also  PG.  25,  753-56. 
^°  Ibid.  124,    "K4p5oi  riji  4>l\oxpvtJ^o.-rlas." 
^""Eist.  Arian.  ad  Mon.  PG.  25,  781. 
^UUd.   788,   789. 
"/6id.  632.  "/6id.    589. 


36  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

plained  thus,  with  Cardinal  Newman:  ^^  "  There 
were,  as  was  natural,  two  classes  of  men  in  the 
heretical  party:  the  fanatical  class  who  began  the 
heresy  and  were  its  real  life,  such  as  Arius,  and 
afterwards  the  Anomoeans,  in  whom  misbelief  was 
a  '  mania  ' ;  and  the  Eusebians,  who  cared  little 
for  a  theory  of  doctrine  or  consistency  of  pro- 
fession, compared  with  their  own  aggrandizement. 
With  these  must  be  included  members  who  con- 
formed to  Arianism  lest  they  should  suffer 
temporal  loss."  Athanasius  is  not  alone  in  attri- 
buting the  spread  of  Arianism  partly  to  corruption. 
Hilary  of  Poitiers  accuses  Constantius  of  resort- 
ing to  this  means  of  arianizing;  his  exempting 
certain  Christians  from  taxes  is  an  invitation  to 
a  denial  of  the  Catholic  faith.^^  Pope  Liberius  ^"^ 
speaks  to  Constantius  of  those  who  prefer  the 
favors  of  the  emperor  to  the  glory  of  God. 
Gregory  ISTazianzen  ^^  tells  of  prominent  men  who, 
loving  gold  more  than  Christ,  ^'<^i\oxpvaoL  /xaWov 
^'  (f)L\oxp^o-TOL"  were  bought  over  to  Arianism. 

Kot  only  among  the  Arians  do  we  find  bishop- 
rics bought  and  sold;  instances  also  occur  within 
the  Catholic  Church.  Jerome  tells  us  that  in  his 
time  there  was  a  goodly  number  of  church  digni- 

"*Sf^.  Athanasius   (London,  1890),  ii,  26. 

"PL.    10,    581    and   587. 

"  Theod.  H.  E.  PG.  82,  1033. 

"PG.  35,  1105. 


FKOM   THE   YEAR  313    TO   476  37 

taries  who  raised  to  the  clerical  state  not  the  more 
useful  persons,  but  "  those  whom  they  loved  or 
whose  complaisance  had  mollified  them ;  or  again 
those  in  whose  favor  any  person  of  influence  had 
submitted  a  petition ;  and,  not  to  speak  of  anything 
worse,  the  applicants,  who  offered  presents  to  back 
up  their  demands."  ^° 

How  vehemently  certain  persons  coveted  the 
episcopal  dignity,  is  exemplified  by  events  which 
took  place  at  Constantinople  during  the  period  in 
which  Gregory  ISTazianzen  was  zealously  working 
at  the  reorganization  of  the  affairs  of  that  church 
(379-381).  Maximus  the  Cynic  made  a  deter- 
mined effort  to  force  himself  as  bishop  on  the 
people  of  the  Imperial  City.  Gregory  ISTazianzen 
originally  entertained  the  highest  regard  for  this 
crafty  and  unscrupulous  personage.  But  soon  a 
plot  was  organized  which  had  for  its  object  the 
intrusion  of  Maximus.  Gregory  himself  graphi- 
cally describes  the  way  in  which  the  Alexandrian 
party  proceeded  to  secure  the  important  see  of 
Constantinople  for  one  of  their  o^vn  men.^^  He 
begins  by  telling  us  that  it  is  held  by  some  that 
wine  is  the  great  ruling  power  in  this  world,  by 
others  that  it  is  woman,  and  again  by  others  that 

^'Comment,  in  Ep.  ad  Tit.  PL.  26,  596-97.  See  also 
Jerome,  Comm.  in  Jerem.  PL.  24,  766. 

"^  Carmen  de  Vita  Sua,  xv,  830-85.  PO.  37,  1086,  seqq.; 
Sozom.  H.  E.  vn,  9. 


38  A   HISTORY   OF    SIMONY 

it  is  truth  that  rules  supreme;  but  according  to 
him  gold  is  the  universal  master.  It  was  with 
gold  that  Maximus  was  enabled  to  execute  his 
dark  designs.  A  priest  from  the  island  of  Thasos 
had  arrived  in  Constantinople  carrying  a  consider- 
able sum  of  church  money  which  was  destined  for 
the  purchase  of  marble.  Maximus  used  flattery 
and  promises  with  such  skill,  that  the  stranger 
became  his  associate  and  put  the  money  at  his 
disposal.  His  friends  deserted  the  penniless 
Gregory  and  supported  his  enemy.  Some  Egyp- 
tian bishops,  with  the  consent  of  the  archbishop 
of  Alexandria,  Peter,  came  to  perform  the  conse- 
cration. Without  previous  notification  to  bishop, 
clergy  or  people,  they  began  the  ceremony  during 
the  night  supported  by  a  number  of  hired  Alexan- 
drian sailors.  At  dawn  the  local  clergy  discovered 
the  high-handed  proceedings.  The  news  of  the 
attempted  intrusion  spread  like  wild-fire  and 
aroused  the  legitimate  indignation  of  the  inhabi- 
tants. Consecrators  and  candidate  were  driven 
from  the  church  before  the  completion  of  the 
ceremony.  The  house  of  a  flute-player,  where  the 
rite  was  concluded,  saw  the  beginning  and  end  of 
the  episcopate  of  Maximus:  he  never  occupied  the 
episcopal  chair  of  Constantinople  or  any  other 
city. 

It  was  but  a  short  time  after  these  events  that 
the  see  which  Maximus  attempted  to  usurp  was 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313   TO   476  39 

occupied  by  John  Chrysostom,  a  prelate  distin- 
guished for  his  fearlessness  in  suppressing  existing 
abuses.  But  persecution  is,  as  a  rule,  the  lot  of 
reformers.  Bitter  opposition,  hardships  and  exile 
were  Chrysostom's  reward  for  the  reformatory 
zeal  which  he  displayed  as  archbishop  of  Constan- 
tinople. Pastoral  visits  like  the  one  he  made  to 
Ephesus  in  the  cause  of  ecclesiastical  discipline, 
would,  while  serving  the  best  interests  of  the 
Church,  naturally  enough  increase  the  number  and 
power  of  his  adversaries.  At  a  council  held  at 
ConstantinoiDle,  in  the  spring  of  the  year  400, 
Eusebius,  bishop  of  Valentinianopolis,  had  brought 
seven  accusations,  most  of  them  grievous,  against 
his  metropolitan,  Antoninus  of  Ephesus,  who  was 
present.  The  last  of  these  charges  was  to  the 
effect  that  it  was  a  firmly  established  rule  and 
law  with  Antoninus  to  sell  the  episcopal  conse- 
cration for  a  sum  proportionate  to  the  revenues 
of  the  see.  "  The  purchasing  and  consecrated 
parties,"  said  Eusebius,  "  are  present  here,  and  I 
have  the  proofs  at  hand."  Chrysostom  promised 
redress  and  asked  the  accuser  to  drop  the  written 
accusation,  as  charges  that  proceed  from  personal 
animosity  are  not  always  easily  proven.  This 
request  aroused  the  ire  of  Eusebius  against  Anto- 
ninus :  he  maintained  the  accusation.  The  media- 
tion of  Paul,  bishop  of  Heraclea,  who  seemed  to 
be    favorably    disposed    towards    Antoninus,    was 


40  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

then  tried,  but  failed  to  effect  a  reconciliation 
between  the  metropolitan  and  his  suffragan.  Euse- 
bius,  in  presence  of  the  assembled  bishops  and 
people,  presented  in  church  with  solemn  adjura- 
tions, another  list  of  the  same  accusations. 
Chrysostom,  seeing  his  insistence  and  desirous 
of  avoiding  disturbance  among  the  congregation, 
accepted  the  bill  of  indictment.  After  reading 
the  Scriptural  extracts  introductory  to  the  holy 
sacrifice,  he  requested  Pansophius,  a  bishop  of 
Pisidia  (the  see  is  unkno\Am),  to  continue  the 
service,  while  he  himself  withdrew  from  the 
church  with  the  other  bishops.  When  the  people 
had  been  dismissed,  the  bishops  assembled  in  the 
baptistery  and  the  accuser  was  then  cited.  Chry- 
sostom  again  requested  him  to  reconsider  his 
decision  before  the  publication  of  the  charges. 
Eusebius  persisted,  and  the  document  was  read. 
The  reading  concluded,  the  senior  members  of  the 
assembly  decreed  that  an  investigation  should  be 
made  regarding  the  most  horrible  of  the  accusa- 
tions, that  of  simony,  as,  according  to  them,  guilt 
on  this  point  meant  guilt  on  all  the  others.  Anto- 
ninus and  the  alleged  purchasers  were  examined 
and  denied  the  charge.  After  a  rather  lengthy 
interrogatory,  the  proceedings  were  postponed 
owing  to  the  absence  of  the  witnesses.  As  their 
summons  to  Constantinople  involved  considerable 
difficulty,  Chrysostom  offered  to  go  to  Asia  imme- 


FROM   THE   YEAR   313   TO   47G  41 

diately.  The  realization  of  his  plan  was  frus- 
trated through  the  intrigue  of  the  uneasy  Anto- 
ninus, who  procured  the  interference  of  the  court. 
Chrysostom  was  advised  that,  in  view  of  the 
impending  troubles  (the  revolt  of  Gainas),  his 
absence  from  the  capital  would  be  untimely.  The 
council  appointed  as  judges  in  the  affair  a  com- 
mittee of  three  other  bishops:  the  metropolitan, 
Syncletius  of  Trajanopolis  in  Greece,  and  two 
Asiatic  prelates,  Hesychius  of  Parium  and  Palla- 
dius  of  Helenopolis;  it  also  pronounced  excom- 
munication against  the  party,  either  accuser  or 
accused,  who  would  not  appear  within  two  months 
at  Hypepe  in  Asia.  Of  the  three  bishops,  Hesy- 
chius proved  his  friendship  for  Antoninus  by 
being  opportunely  taken  ill ;  Syncletius  and  Palla- 
dius  proceeded  to  Hypepe.  Meanwhile  Antoninus 
and  Eusebius  settled  their  differences,  a  bribe  from 
the  metropolitan  having  persuaded  his  suffragan 
to  take  an  oath  to  withdraw  the  accusation. 
Both  parties,  however,  appeared  at  Hypepe,  but 
without  witnesses.  The  judges  signified  their 
willingness  to  wait,  and  Eusebius  relying  on  the 
torrid  heat  of  the  season  for  the  dispersal  of  the 
judges,  promised,  in  a  written  statement,  to  pro- 
duce the  witnesses  within  40  days  or  incur  the 
canonical  penalties.  Instead  of  preparing  for  the 
trial,  he  retired  to  Constantinople  where  he  re- 
mained in  concealment.     The  judges  waited  for 


42  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

the  stated  time.  As  Eusebius  did  not  appear  they 
issued  a  circular  letter  to  the  bishops  of  Asia, 
announcing  his  excommunication.  Another  wait 
of  thirty  days  was  equally  fruitless.  On  their 
return  to  Constantinople,  they  met  Eusebius  who 
alleged  poor  health  as  an  excuse  and  again 
promised  to  produce  his  testimony. 

Meanwhile  Antoninus  died.  At  his  demise,  the 
bishops  of  Asia  and  the  clergy  of  Ephesus  sent 
a  petition  to  Chrysostom,  adjuring  him,  in  the 
strongest  language,  to  come  and  restore  order  in 
the  church  of  Ephesus.  The  troubles  there  were 
caused  by  the  Arians  and  also  by  avaricious 
and  ambitious  Catholics,  many  of  whom  were  seek- 
ing to  obtain  by  means  of  money,  possession  of 
the  vacant  see.  In  spite  of  his  poor  health  and 
the  winter  season,  Chrysostom  departed  for  Asia. 
He  held  a  council  at  Ephesus,  at  which  Eusebius 
of  Valentinianopolis  appeared  asking  for  read- 
mission  into  the  church  and  for  permission  to 
introduce  the  witnesses  on  the  same  day.  Having 
first  manifested  some  opposition  to  his  request, 
the  council  decided  to  resume  the  long-pending 
trial.  A  report  of  the  proceedings  to  date  was 
first  read;  then  the  witnesses  and  the  six  accused 
bishops  were  introduced.  The  latter  began  with 
a  denial  of  the  charge.  But  they  had  to  yield 
before  the  testimony  of  priests,  laymen  and  women, 
in  which  the  kind,  place,  time  and  quantity  of  the 


FROM   THE   YEAR   313   TO   476  43 

reward  were  specified.  They  finally  made  the 
following  confession :  "  We  paid  and  were  conse- 
crated, but  imagined  that  this  was  customary  in 
order  to  be  freed  from  the  curial  offices  (municipal 
charges).  We  now  ask  to  be  left  in  the  service 
of  the  Church ;  or  if  not,  that  our  gold  be  restored 
to  us,  as  some  of  us  gave  away  the  personal  ap- 
parel of  our  wives."  Chrysostom  announced  that 
he  hoped  the  emperor  would,  at  his  request,  ex- 
empt them  from  the  curial  charges,  and  asked 
the  council  to  order  the  restitution  of  the  sum 
given  in  payment.  The  assembly  agreed  to  this 
and  also  pronounced  deposition  against  the  cul- 
prits. They  acquiesced  in  the  sentence  and  re- 
ceived worthy  successors.^^ 

About  the  same  time,  Chrysostom  deposed  the 
very  popular  Gerontius,  bishop  of  ]S[icomedia. 
Gerontius  owed  his  appointment  to  persons  of  in- 
fluence at  the  imperial  palace,  and  had  been  con- 
secrated by  Helladius  of  Caesarea  in  Cappadocia, 
for  whose  son  he  had  previously  obtained  an 
important  position  at  court. ^^ 

A  friend  and  admirer  of  Chrysostom  and  a 
champion  of  his  memory  after  his  death,  furnishes 
us  with  considerable  information  concerning  eccle- 

**  On  Chrysostom  and  these  various  events,  consult  Palla- 
dius,  Dial,  de  Vita  Ghrys.  PG.  47,  47-52.  Soz.  H.  E.  vin,  6, 
10.     See.  H.  E.  VI,  11. 

=^  Soz.  H.  E.  vm,  6. 


44  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

siastical  affairs  in  another  section  of  the  Christian 
world.  The  numerous  letters  of  Isidore  (d.  c. 
440)  priest  and  abbot  of  a  monastery  near  Pelu- 
sium  in  Egypt,  contain,  apart  from  their  exegetical 
and  practical  moral  significance,  valuable  details 
regarding  the  history  of  his  time.  ]S[or  does  Isi- 
dore content  himself  with  a  bare  statement  of  the 
facts  as  he  knows  them.  In  speaking  of  abuses, 
he  earnestly  pleads  for  their  suppression  and  the 
amelioration  of  conditions.  Like  Chrysostom, 
though  in  a  different  way,  owing  to  the  difference 
in  character  and  position,  he  is  a  great  moral 
reformer.  He  frequently  speaks,  in  a  general  way, 
of  the  cupidity,  the  love  of  money  of  contempo- 
rary ecclesiastics.^^  But,  as  in  the  case  of  most 
moral  reformers,  allowance  must  be  made  for  his 
power  of  generalization ;  his  statements  concerning 
the  general  ecclesiastical  degeneracy  of  his  days, 
and  especially  those  regarding  simoniacal  prac- 
tices must  be  received  with  reserve.  The  reported 
purchase  of  the  episcopal  dignity  by  the  Egyptian 
bishop  Leontius  forms  the  subject  of  one  of  his 
letters  addressed  to  John  Chrysostom. ^^  The  re- 
port, however,  lacked  foundation,  as  Isidore  him- 
self later  acknowledged.^^  Erom  the  document  in 
which  he  admits  his  error  we  see  that  great  abuses 

"""Epp.  in,  216,  223;   v,  21,   131. 
='*Spp.   I,   315;    pa.   78,   364-5. 
^^Epp.  Ill,  387,  iUd.  1028-9. 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313   TO   476  45 

prevailed  in  this  connection,  abuses  which  he  stig- 
matizes iu  other  letters.-^'  The  ecclesiastical  con- 
ditions of  his  own  diocese,  Pelusium,  were  de- 
plorable. "  Report  has  it,"  he  says,  "  that  Euse- 
bius  (the  bishop  of  Pelusium)  uses  the  money 
derived  from  episcopal  elections  in  building  a 
magnificent  church."  -^  That  Eusebius  and  Marti- 
nianus,  his  "  oeconomus,"  or  church  steward,  were 
responsible  for  the  prevalence  of  simony  in  the 
Pelusian  church  at  the  time,  is  a  statement  he 
makes  in  a  letter  to  Cyril  of  Alexandria  whom 
Martinianus,  perhaps  more  surely  to  ward  off 
suspicion,  accused  of  this  vice.^^  Accusations 
were  in  circulation  that  Eusebius  sold  the  "  im- 
position of  hands,"  ^^  a  practice  against  which 
Isidore  warns  him.^®  That  he  had  ordained  the 
jDriest  Zosimus  for  money  was  notorious,^  ^  and  to 
this  he  added  the  ordination  of  Maron,  another 
Simon.^^  In  almost  every  one  of  Isidore's  letters 
to  Eusebius,  allusion  is  made  to  the  latter's 
simoniacal  dealings  or  at  least  to  his  cupidity.^^ 
Similar  allusions  also  figure  in  some  of  his  letters 
to   Maron    and   Zosimus.^^     To   these   names   he 

'^Epp.  Ill,  394;  V,  357. 

""Epp.  I,  37;   II,  246. 

"^Epp.  II,  127;  PG.  78,  565-74. 

=*I,  26.  ^I,   30. 

"I,  113.  =^1,    119. 

"'I,  151,  177,  185,  215,  341,  425,  492;   Cp.  also  II,  71. 

*•  See  PG.  78,  Index  Eorum  ad  quos  scripsit  Isid.  s.  w. 


46  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

adds  in  a  letter  to  Theon,^^  those  of  Palladius  and 
Eustathius,  as  clerics  to  whom  Eusebius  sold  ordi- 
nation, from  which  the  archdeacon  Lucius  also 
derived  gain.^^  These  facts  exhibit  the  fearless 
Isidore  as  one  of  the  first  great  champions  of 
ecclesiastical  integrity.  His  zeal  probably  de- 
ceived him  into  exaggerated  general  statements; 
but  it  is  evident  that  there  was  abundant  cause 
for  the  severity  of  his  language. 

At  the  death  of  Proclus,  archbishop  of  Constan- 
tinople, Flavian  was  elected  (446  or  447)  to  fill 
the  vacancy. ^"^  The  eunuch  Chrysaphius,  who 
was  then  all  powerful  with  the  emperor,  displeased 
at  the  choice,  suggested  to  Theodosius  II,  then  at 
Chalcedon,  to  intimate  to  the  patriarch  that  he 
send  him  (Chrysaphius)  the  "  eulogiae  "  for  his 
elevation.  Flavian  forwarded  to  him  what  seems 
to  have  been  a  usual  present  on  such  occasions, 
some  blessed  loaves.  Chrysaphius  scornfully  re- 
jected these  and  replied  that  it  was  gold  that  the 
emperor  demanded  and  not  bread.  The  bishop, 
according  to  one  version,^^  answered  that  he  had 
no  gold  but  that  of  the  sacred  vessels;  according 
to  another,^^  wishing  to  cover  the  insolent  eunuch 

■^11,  121.  =«i,  29. 

^' Theophanes,    Chronog.    ad   ann.    440,   PQ.    108,    256-7; 
Nicephorus   Callisti,   Hist.  Ecc.   xiv,   47,   PG.    146,    1222. 
^^  Theoph.  and  Niceph.  II.  cc. 
»»Evagrius,  Hist.  Ecc.  ii,  2,  PG.  186  bis,  2489-92. 


FROM   THE    YEAR   313    TO   476  47 

with  confusion,  he  sent  him  the  vessels.  However 
this  may  be,  certain  it  is  that  Chrysaphius  hence- 
forward used  his  influence  to  destroy  Flavian. 

As  soon  as  Ibas,  the  Svriac  translator  of  Theo- 
dore of  Mopsuestia,  had  been  raised  (c.  435)  to 
the  episcopal  see  of  Edessa,  the  opposition  against 
him  declared  itself.  It  was  especially  his  doctri- 
nal views,  tinged  with  I^estorianism  according  to 
some,  that  gave  offence.  About  447,  four  of  his 
clerics,  Samuel,  Cyrus,  Eulogius  and  Maras 
presented  a  bill  of  indictment  against  him  to 
Domnus,  bishop  of  Antioch.^*'  The  case  was  to 
be  tried  in  a  synod  at  the  latter  city  (447  or  448). 
But  when  the  council  assembled,  two  of  the  accu- 
sers, Samuel  and  Cyrus,  in  order  to  secure  a  more 
favorable  hearing,  had  left  for  Constantinople  in 
spite  of  the  grievous  penalties  (excommunication 
and  deposition)  which  they  incurred  through 
their  departure.  The  synod  dispersed  without 
taking  any  decision.  The  two  other  accusers  soon 
joined  their  colleagues  at  Constantinople,  and  the 
result  was  that  the  emperor  instituted  a  commission 
of  investigation.  Eighteen  accusations  '*^  against 
Ibas  were  laid  by  the  four  accusers  before  this 
commission,  which  met  at  Tyre  and  Berytus  (448 
or  449).^-     The  third  charge  was  that  Ibas  re- 

"Liberat.   Breviar.   x,    PL.   68,    992-3. 
"Mansi,  vii,  219-28. 

*^0n  this  see  Hefele,  Conciliengesch.  2d  ed.  11,  309-12. 
New  French  ed.  11,  490-498. 


48  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

ceived  money  for  ordinations.  The  members  of 
the  commission,  acting  more  as  peace-makers  than 
as  judges,  proposed  a  compromise  to  which  both 
parties  consented. ^^  Ibas  promised  kind  treat- 
ment to  his  opponents  and  accepted  "  oeconomi," 
or  administrators  to  whom  was  entrusted  the 
management  of  the  ecclesiastical  revenues  of  his 
diocese.  The  clerics,  on  the  other  hand,  dropped 
the  accusations.  The  arrangement  made  no  men- 
tion, either  explicitly  or  implicitly,  of  Ibas'  al- 
leged simoniacal  ordinations.  The  institution  of 
"  oeconomi  "  had  its  cause  solely  in  the  real  or 
alleged  malversations  of  the  bishop.  But  the  truce 
was  a  short  one;  at  the  robber-synod  of  Ephesus 
(449),^^  Ibas  was,  without  a  hearing,  sentenced  to 
deposition,  because  his  views  did  not  square  with 
those  of  the  Eutychian  party.  He  was  reinstated 
by  the  oecumenical  council  of  Chalcedon  (451).*'''' 
His  alleged  guilt  in  accepting  pecuniary  compensa- 
tion for  spiritual  functions  was  never  proved. 

Under  the  administration  of  the  great  Cyril 
(412-44),  the  patriarchal  see  of  Alexandria  had 
risen  to  the  zenith  of  its  power.  So  disastrous 
were  the  consequences  of  the  tyranny  of  his  imme- 

*'Man8i,  vii,  197  seqq. 

"Lib.  Brev.  xiii,  PL.  68,  1013;  Evag.  Eist.  Eccl.  Lib.  i, 
X,  PG.  86  bis,  2448. 

^'Mansi,  vil,  262  seqq.;  Evag.  op.  cit.  Lib.  ii,  iv,  PG. 
86  bis,  2509.     See  Hefele,   Concg.  2d  ed.  Ii,   479-91. 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313   TO   47G  49 

diate  successor,  the  infamous  Dioscorus  (444-51), 
that  the  great  church  never  recovered  from  the 
severe  blow  which  was  dealt  it.  Peace  did  not 
come  with  the  decisions  of  Chalcedon.  Discussions 
continued,  particularly  in  Egypt,  although  a  suc- 
cessor was  elected  to  the  banished  Dioscorus  in 
the  person  of  the  saintly  Proterius  (451-57). 
Timothy  x\iluros  (the  Cat),  a  monk  and  priest, 
refused  to  recognize  the  authority  of  the  newly 
elected  bishop  and  was  deposed  and  banished  into 
Libya.  The  opposition  to  Proterius  resulted  in  a 
serious  insurrection  during  the  reign  of  the  em- 
peror Marcian  (450-57),  and  at  the  latter's  death, 
the  banished  Timothy  returned  to  Alexandria  and 
renewed  the  disturbances.  He  was  in  the  habit 
of  creeping  to  the  cells  of  the  monks  during  the 
night ;  then  calling  them  each  by  name,  and  pro- 
claiming himself  an  angel  of  God,  he  ordered 
them  to  secede  from  Proterius  and  choose  Timothy 
(himself)  as  bishop.^^  To  this  practice  he  possi- 
bly owed  his  surname  of  "  xiiluros."  The  already 
existing  oppositional  elements,  the  ever  turbulent 
spirit  of  the  i\.lexandrian  population,  and  the  dis- 
tribution of  money  ^'^  enabled  him  to  gather,  with- 

"Theophan.  PG.  108,  1,  280-84;  Theodor.  Lect.  PG.  86, 
1,   169-72. 

"  Theoph.  I.  c.  281.  For  the  history  of  Timothy  Ailuros, 
see  also  Evagr.  Hist.  Eccl.  11,  chaps.  5,  8-11;  Liberatus, 
Brev.  cc.  14-16,  PL.  68,  1016-19;  Leo  Mag.  Epp.  PL.  54, 
nos.  1-45,  156-58,  162,  164,  169,  170;  Gelas.  Brevic.  hist. 
Eutijch.  4-5,  ed.  Thiel,  514-15. 

4 


50  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

out  considerable  difficulty,  a  violent  mob,  with 
whose  aid  he  seized  the  "  Caesarean  Church." 
Here  he  had  himself  consecrated  bishop  of  Alex- 
andria during  the  life-time  of  Proterius,  by  two 
deposed  bishops,  Eusebius  of  Pelusium  and  Peter 
of  Majuma.  Shortly  afterwards,  Proterius  was 
murdered  in  a  baptistery  as  a  result,  no  doubt,  of 
the  disturbances  instigated  by  Timothy.  The 
latter  now  usurped  the  succession  of  Proterius, 
ejected  the  lawfully  constituted  clerics  who  were 
loyal  to  the  council  of  Chalcedon  and  his  prede- 
cessor, performed  new  ordinations  and  diverted  to 
his  own  partisans  church  funds  destined  for  the 
poor.  That  his  opponents  would  silently  and 
promptly  submit  to  the  unscrupulous  usurper  was 
not  to  be  expected.  Both  parties  appealed  to  the 
emperor  Leo  I  (45Y-T4),  to  whom  his  namesake 
Pope  Leo  I  (440-Gl),  also  wrote  in  favor  of  the 
council  of  Chalcedon  and  against  Timothy.  The 
emperor  demanded  and  received  from  the  occu- 
pants of  some  of  the  principal  Eastern  sees  an 
expression  of  their  opinion  on  the  recent  proceed- 
ings in  Egypt.^^  As  it  was  a  unanimous  condem- 
nation of  the  intrusion  of  Timothy,  the  usurper 

**  See  the  letters  of  the  Egyptian  parties  and  of  the 
emperor  and  the  answer  of  the  bishops  consulted,  in  Mansi, 
VII,  524  seqq.  The  bishops  of  Moesia  Secunda  answered 
that  Timothy  was  "  to  be  reckoned  as  under  anathema  and 
among  Simoniacs  "   (op.  cit.  546). 


FROM   THE   YEAR   313   TO   476  51 

was   driven   from   Alexandria   and   shortly   after 
banished  to  the  Chersonese. ^^ 

That  simony  was  not  unknown  in  Gaul  during 
this  period,  we  know  from  the  history  of  Patro- 
clus,  bishop  of  Aries  (412-426),  whom  his  con- 
temporary Prosper  Tiro  accuses  of  selling 
ecclesiastical  oflSces.^"  But  we  are  especially  in- 
debted to  Sidonius  Apollinaris  (c.  430-82)  for 
information  regarding  simoniacal  dealings  in  that 
country.  He  gives  us  a  graphic  description  of 
the  nomination  of  a  successor  to  Paul  II,  who 
died  about  470  as  bishop  of  Chalon-sur-Saone. 
The  metropolitan  Patiens  of  Lyons  and  the  bishops 
of  the  province  assembled  at  Chalon  to  fill  the 
vacancy.  They  found  the  city  torn  with  faction 
by  three  competitors,  who  fought  for  the  succession 
and  had  each  his  supporters.  One  party  con- 
sidered mere  nobility  of  birth  in  its  candidate, 
sufficient  qualification  for  the  office;  the  second 
faction  was  composed  of  parasites,  who  put  for- 
ward a  man  whose  delicious  and  palatable  feasts 
they  had  enjoyed  and  naturally  expected  to  con- 
tinue to  enjoy ;  by  tacit  agreement,  a  liberal  booty 
of  ecclesiastical  revenues  had  been  assured  to  his 
supporters  by  the  third  seeker  after  episcopal 
honors.     The  determination  of  Patiens  and  Eu- 

*°  For    the    subsequent    history    of    Timothy    Ailuros    see 
Neale,  Holy  East.  Church,  Alex,   ii,   15  seqq. 
'^PL.  51,   862. 


52  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

phronius  of  Aiitiin  to  secure  the  triumph  of  a 
worthy  candidate  was  not  abated  by  the  realization 
of  this  deplorable  condition  of  affairs.  They 
resolved  to  proceed  with  the  appointment  of  a 
bishop,  regardless  of  the  factions  and  in  spite  of 
them.  After  consultation  with  their  fellow- 
bishops  and  without  previous  notice  to  the  people, 
a  respectable  priest,  John,  who  had  neither  epis- 
copal aspirations  nor  the  least  suspicion  of  the 
intention  of  the  bishops  was  seized  and  received 
consecration.  Remarkable  for  his  honesty,  hu- 
mility and  meekness,  his  nomination  was  hailed 
with  delight  by  the  better  element  of  the  inhabi- 
tants and  met  with  no  open  opposition  from  any 
of  the  parties.  ^^ 

Some  two  years  later  (c.  472)  another  nomina- 
tion to  a  bishopric  took  place,  which  throws  con- 
siderable light  on  the  state  of  ecclesiastical  affairs 
in  Gaul  at  the  time.  Sidonius  himself,  who  had 
become  bishop  of  Clermont,  was  to  play  the  most 
important  role  in  the  proceedings.  A  vacancy 
had  occurred  at  Bourges,  the  metropolitan  see  of 
Aquitania  Prima.  Most  of  the  bishoprics  of  the 
province  had  fallen  in  471  into  the  hands  of  the 
Visigoths.  But  in  spite  of  the  troublous  times 
and  the  absence  of  the  bishops  of  the  province, 
the  inhabitants  of  Bourges  could  not  agree  in  the 

"  MGH.  Auct.  Ant.  viii,  76-77. 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313    TO   47G  53 

choice  of  a  successor.  There  was  no  lack  of  can- 
didates for  the  office,  some  of  whom  were  most 
willing  to  purchase  the  sacred  dignity.  Indeed  so 
numerous  were  the  applicants  for  the  position  that 
two  benches  were  not  sufficient  to  seat  them. 
Their  popularity  is  summed  up  by  Sidonius 
Apollinaris  in  the  words  that  ''  they  all  pleased 
themselves,  but  displeased  everybody  else."  The 
people  of  the  city  summoned  Sidonius  to  Bourges 
for  the  election.  The  latter,  before  taking  any 
decisive  step,  consulted  Agroecius,  archbishop  of 
Sens  and  Euphronius,  bishop  of  Autun.  An  end 
Avas  ultimately  put  to  the  division  and  rivalry 
among  the  inhabitants  by  a  common  agreement 
to  abide  by  the  decision  of  Sidonius.  They  bound 
themselves  in  writing  and  by  oath  to  accept  as 
bishop  whomsoever  he  would  designate.  At  the 
conclusion  of  a  discourse,  in  which  he  had  sworn 
that  he  had  yielded  neither  to  money  nor  favor  in 
his  choice,  he  announced  his  decision  in  the  follow- 
ing solemn  manner:  "  In  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  I  declare 
that  Simplicius  ought  to  be  the  metropolitan  of 
cur  province  and  the  supreme  prelate  of  your 
city."  The  inhabitants  abided  by  the  nomination 
of  Sidonius.  Simplicius  being  a  layman  and  the 
father  of  a  family  his  elevation  to  the  episcopate 
was  uncanonical.     His,   however,   is  only  one  of 


54  A   HISTORY   OF    SIMONY 

many  instances  of  the  time  where  the  canons  were 

ignored  in  this  regard.     Sidonius  himself  was  only 

a  layman  when  he  was  called  to  the  bishopric  of 
Clermont.  ^2 


"Sid.  Apoll.  Epp.  VII,  5,  8,  9  ed.  Luetjohann  in  MOH. 
Auct.  Ant.  Ylii;  Ceillier,  Hist,  des  Auteurs  EccUsiast.  x, 
380-81. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  ATTITUDE  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE  TOWARDS 
SIMONY  FROM  313  TO  476 

Pope  Sirieius  and  ordinations  —  Utterances  of  Gregory 
Nazianzen  and  Ambrose  —  Conduct  of  Hilarion  —  Chry- 
sostom  and  episcopal  elections  —  Sulpicius  Severus, 
Jerome,  Augustine  —  The  48th  canon  of  Elvira  — 
The  councils  of  Nicaea,  Antioch,  Sardica  —  Letter  of 
Basil  —  Pope  Leo  I  — Some  Apostolic  Canons  —  The 
2d  canon  of  Chalcedon  —  The  patriarch  Gennadius  and 
simony  — Edict  of  the  Eastern  emperor  Leo  I  —  Similar 
edict  of  the  emperor  Glycerins. 

The  attitude  of  ecclesiastical  authority  in  face 
of  the  spread  of  simony  though  discernible  to 
some  extent  from  the  foregoing  exposition  of  facts, 
needs  further  elucidation.  Pope  Sirieius  (384- 
99)  insists  that  favor  cannot  be  a  sufficient  reason 
for  admission  to  the  episcopal  office.  As  for  him- 
self he  has  always  refused  to  consider,  in  spite  of 
the  interposition  of  powerful  supporters,  the  oft- 
repeated  application  for  episcopal  honors  of  per- 
sons who  were  excluded  by  ecclesiastical  discipline. 
The  wrong  character  of  the  following  practice  can 
hardly  be  overestimated,  viz.  that,  certain  bishops, 
rather  than  bear  the  expense  of  supporting  va- 
grants who  rightly  or  wrongly  style  themselves 
monks,  raise  them  to  the  diaconate,  priesthood  or 

55 


56  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

even  to  the  episcopate,  and  this  without  even  know- 
ing whether  thej  were  orthodox  or  baptized. 

Gregory  ITazianzen  (d.  389  or  390)  deprecates 
the  evil  of  his  time,  when,  in  some  instances,  not 
virtue  but  criminal  practices  and  power  led  to  the 
episcopal  dignity.^  Ambrose  (d.  39Y)  tells  us 
that  "  the  precept  of  the  Lord  and  the  example 
of  the  prophet  (Elizaeus),  teach  the  bishop  that, 
as  he  freely  received  so  he  should  freely  give 
(Matth.  X,  8),  that  he  should  not  sell  his  minis- 
trations, but  offer  them.  The  grace  of  God  is  not 
valued  at  a  temporal  price  and  gain  is  not  sought 
in  holy  things,  but  the  service  of  the  bishop." 
^or  does  it  suffice  for  the  latter,  according  to  the 
same  author,  not  to  seek  his  own  profit ;  the  mem- 
bers of  his  household  also  should  refrain  from  the 
acceptance  of  reward.  Episcopal  instructions  and 
exhortations  should  preserve  them  from  sin  in  this 
respect.  In  case  of  transgression,  the  memory  of 
the  terrible  leprosy  with  which  Giezi  and  his 
posterity  were  stricken,  will  convince  the  offender 
that  the  sale  of  things  sacred  constitutes  an  in- 
expiable sin,  the  punishment  of  which  will  extend 
even  to  his  descendants."  The  passage  of  Matthew, 
xxi^  12,  became  a  favorite  weapon,  used  by  eccle- 
siastical writers  in  their  attacks  on  venality  in 

^Pa.   36,   532-3. 

-  Comm.    in    Lug.    in    Corptis    Script.    Eccl.    Lat,    xxxil, 
pars.  IV,  ed.  Schenkl    (1902),  164-6. 


FROM   THE   YEAR   313   TO   476  57 

spiritualities.  It  reads :  ''  And  Jesus  went  into 
the  temple  of  God,  and  cast  out  all  them  that  sold 
and  bought  in  the  temple,  and  overthrew  the  tables 
of  the  money  changers,  and  the  chairs  of  them 
that  sold  doves."  Its  content  does  not  refer  to 
simony  properly  so  called,  but  it  treats  of  traffic 
in  the  holy  place,  and  suggests,  if  only  remotely, 
profit  derived  from  the  transactions  by  priestly 
officials.^  Ambrose,  in  interpreting  the  text,  takes 
it  to  signify  the  exclusion  from  the  church  of  God 
of  those  who  sell  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  at 
auction ;  for  they  disobey  their  instructions  to  give 
freely  as  they  freely  received  and  incur  the  con- 
demnation pronounced  by  Peter  against  Simon 
Magus."* 

How  diligently  Hilarion  (d.  3T1),  the  founder 
of  monasticism  in  Palestine,  avoided  even  the 
appearance  of  simony,  is  evidenced  by  his  conduct 
towards  Orion,  a  prominent  and  wealthy  citizen 
of  Aila,  a  city  on  the  coast  of  the  Red  Sea.  Orion 
had  been  possessed  by  a  legion  of  demons,  from 
which  Hilarion  had  delivered  him.  Out  of  grate- 
fulness, the  former  shortly  afterwards  appeared 
before  his  benefactor  with  his  wife  and  children 
and  offered  him  rich  presents.  Hilarion  refused 
the  spontaneously  proferred  gifts,  citing  the  pun- 

^  See  Edersheim,  The  Life  and  Times  of  Jesus,  8th  ed. 
(New   York   and   London,    1896),   i,    368    seqq. 
*  Corpus  Scrip.  Eccl.  Lat.  xxxii,  P.  IV,  444-5. 


68  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

ishment  which  had  been  inflicted  on  Giezi,  who 
had  sold  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  on 
Simon  Magus,  who  had  attempted  to  buy  it.  In 
spite  of  Orion's  humble  but  excessive  insistence 
and  tears,  the  hermit  declined  to  accept  the 
presents  even  for  distribution  to  the  poor.^ 

Chrysostom  gives  us  a  sad  picture  of  the  episco- 
pal elections  in  his  time.^  The  electors  did  not 
look  for  that  qualification  which  alone  they  ought 
to  have  regarded,  the  virtue  of  the  soul.  One 
voted  for  the  candidate  of  noble  extraction,  another 
for  the  one  possessed  of  wealth,  a  third  was  swayed 
by  partisan  feeling.  Friendship,  relationship, 
flattery  determined  the  votes  of  others.  The  claims 
of  the  worthy  candidate  were  not  considered. 
After  this  statement  of  current  happenings  in  this 
respect,  Chrysostom  puts  on  record  his  disappro- 
bation of  such  determining  factors  in  ecclesiastical 
elections.  He  sees  in  the  promotion  of  unworthy 
candidates  to  church  dignities  the  cause  of  the 
punishments  with  which  God  visited  his  contempo- 
raries. Speaking  in  another  of  his  works,'^  of 
those  who  covet  the  episcopal  office,  he  warns  them 
of  what  befell  Simon  Magus  and  asks :  "  What  is 
the   difference,    if   you   do   not   use   money,    but 

"Jerome,   Vita  Hilar,  c.   18,  PL.   23,  36-37. 
'De  Bacerdotio,  in,   15,  PG.  48,  651-4.     Cp.  also  ill,  9, 
ihid.  646. 

'  ///  Rom.  in  Act.  App.  PG.  60,  40-41. 


FROM   THE   YEAR   313   TO   476  59 

instead  have  recourse  to  flattery,  artifice  and  in- 
trigue ?  It  was  said  to  Simon :  '  Keep  thy  money 
to  thyself,  to  perish  with  thee,  because  thou  hast 
thought  that  the  gift  of  God  may  be  purchased 
with  money.'  It  will  be  said  to  these:  'Your 
ambition  perish  with  you  because  you  have  thought 
that  the  gift  of  God  may  be  purchased  with 
human  artifices.'  " 

Sulpicius  Severus  (c.  363-420)  ^  contrasts  the 
great  desire  for  martyrdom  in  the  Christians  of 
pre-Constantinian  times  with  the  unholy  ardor, 
with  which  some  in  his  own  day  aspired  to  the 
episcopate.  The  introduction  of  commercialism 
into  the  spiritual  world  means,  according  to 
Jerome  (d.  420),  depreciation  of  its  treasures. 
He  sees  in  this  fact  the  reason  for  the  condemna- 
tion of  avarice  in  the  oft-quoted  passage  of  the 
free  reception  and  free  distribution  of  divine 
favors  (Matth.  x^  8).^  The  one  who  seeks 
earthly  gain  in  religion  he  considers  a  thief,  who 
transforms  the  temple  of  God  into  a  den  of 
thieves;  and  the  religious  teacher  who  yields  to 
venal  motives  is,  in  his  eyes,  devoid  of  all  dignity.^*' 
Startling  though  baseless  is  Jerome's  assertion  ^^ 
that  the  rich  young  man  mentioned  in  Matthew 

*  Corpus  Script.  Eccl.  Lat.  i,  86,  ed.  Halm,  Chronic. 
n,  32. 

'Comment,  in  Ev.  Matth.  1,  x;   PL.  26,   62. 

^"Ibid.  Ill,  xxi;  PL.  26,  150-2.  "PL.  26,  62-3. 


60  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

(xiX;,  16-23)  as  receiving  the  teaching  of  our  Lord 
with  insufficient  generosity,  walked  away  sad,  be- 
cause, like  Simon  Magus,  he  expected  the  per- 
formance of  miracles  to  be  a  source  of  revenue. 
So  far  as  Augustine  is  concerned,^-  it  will  suffice 
to  note  as  a  detail  of  Christian  symbolism  and 
a  more  direct  application  of  Matthew  (xxi^  12)  to 
simony,  the  fact  that  for  him  the  dove  which 
figures  in  the  traffic  in  the  temple,  represents  the 
Holy  Ghost. 

The  earliest  ecclesiastical  legislation  concerning 
simony,  so  far  as  we  know,  comes  from  Spain. 
The  forty-eighth  canon  of  Elvira,  the  oldest 
council  (c.  300)  of  which  we  have  any  canons 
reads  as  follows: 

"  We  decree  the  abolition  of  the  custom,  prevailing 
among  those  who  receive  baptism,  of  placing  a  pe- 
cuniary ofEering  in  the  shell  (used  to  baptize),  lest 
the  bishop  appear  to  distribute  for  a  fee  what  he 
freely  received.  Nor  are  the  feet  of  the  newly- 
baptized  to  be  washed  by  either  bishop  or  clergy." 

"  Emendari  placuit  ut  hi  qui  baptizantur,  ut  fieri 
solebat,  nummos  in  concha  non  mittant,  ne  sacerdos 
quod  gratis  accepit  pretio  distrahere  videatur.  Ne- 
que  pedes  eorum  lavandi  sunt  a  sacerdotibus  vel 
clericis."  ^^ 

"Aug.  in  Psalm.  130,  5;  PL.  37,  1706.  See  also  Tract. 
X  in  cap.  II  Joann.  PL.  35,  1468-71. 

"Hefele,  Conciliengesch.  i,   177,  New  French  ed.  i,  249. 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313   TO   476  61 

This  canon  reveals  the  anxious  care  with  which 
the  members  of  the  council  protected  the  good 
reputation  of  the  clergy.  It  also  discloses  a  tend- 
ency towards  the  introduction  of  perquisites  now 
beginning  to  manifest  itself.  The  generosity  of 
the  faithful  in  its  initial  fervor  spontaneously 
and  amply  furnished  the  funds  necessary  for  the 
support  of  the  clergy  and  the  proper  observance 
of  worship.  x\s  time  went  on,  however,  the  free 
contributions  did  not  increase  in  proportion  with 
the  needs  of  the  Church  and  its  ministers. 
This  disproportion  was  among  the  reasons  which 
led  first  to  the  acceptance,  then  also  to  the  im- 
position of  a  fee  on  occasion  of  the  performance 
of  certain  rites.  In  the  Spanish  custom  just  men- 
tioned, there  is  as  yet  only  question  of  free  dona- 
tions. But  it  should  be  noticed  that  they  were 
already  made  for  the  rendering  of  some  specific 
service,  i.  e.,  the  administration  of  baptism.  The 
practice  was  suppressed  for  a  time,  but  later 
gained  ground  and  triumphed.  Circumstances 
and  the  remembrance  of  the  spiritual  maxim, 
"  The  workman  is  worthy  of  his  meat,"  ^^  were 
to  prove  stronger  than  the  zeal  of  bishops. 

The  prohibition  regarding  the  passing  of  a 
bishop,  or  other  members  of  the  clergy  from  one 

Mansi,  ii,  13-14.     The  canon  has  been  incorporated  in  the 
Corp.  Jur.  Can.   c.  104,  C.  1,  q.   1. 
"Matth.  X,   10. 


62  A   HISTORY   OF   SIMONY 

diocese  to  another  became,  after  its  promulgation 
at  ISTicaea,^^  a  frequent  enactment  of  subsequent 
councils.  The  synod  of  Antioch  (341)  ^^  renewed 
the  prohibitive  measure  and  the  first  and  second 
canons  of  Sardica  (most  probably  343-344)  ^'^  also 
bear  on  the  subject.  The  second  canon  of  the 
latter  council  seeks  to  prevent  the  indirectly  simo- 
niacal  promotion  from  a  less  to  a  more  important 
episcopal  see.  The  following  translation  may  be 
given  from  its  Greek  text: 

"  Should  any  one  be  found  so  foolhardy  or  rash 
as  to  put  forward  the  assertion  that  he  received 
letters  from  the  people  (of  the  more  important  see), 
it  is  manifest  that,  in  that  city  he  may  have  won  over 
a  few  through  bribery,  so  as  to  make  them  rise  in 
church  and  demand  him  as  their  bishop.  I  deem  it 
necessary  to  utterly  condemn  such  fraudulent  pro- 
ceedings and  to  pronounce  such  a  one,  to  his  very 
death,  unworthy  even  of  lay  communion.  Pass  sen- 
tence upon  this.  The  synod  answered :  '  We  ap- 
prove of  what  has  been  said.' "  ^^ 

^Can.  15,  Mansi,  n,  673-76. 

^«Can.  21,  Ibid,  n,  1317. 

"  The  text  is  given  in  Hefele,  Concg.  i,  558-60 ;  New 
French  ed.  i,  760-62.  On  the  recent  discussion  regarding 
the  genuineness  of  the  canons  of  Sardica,  see  Funk,  Die 
Echtheit  der  Eanones  von  Sardica,  Hist.  Jahrb.  der  Gor- 
resges.  (1905)  xxvi,  1-18,  255-74;  reprinted  in  his  Kircheng. 
Abhandlungen,  Vol.  in  (1907). 

^'  The  canon  has  been  taken  over  into  the  Corp.  Jur.  Can. 
c.  2,  De  Electione,  i,  6. 


FROM  THE  YEAR  313   TO  476  63 

A  letter  of  Basil  ^^  which  is  referred  to  the 
beginning  of  his  episcopate  at  Caesarea,  SYO-Yl, 
and  addressed  to  his  suffragans,  constitutes  another 
legislative  and  very  instructive  document  of  the 
period.  The  following  is  an  account  of  the  letter 
in  which  we  have  grouped  together  what  logically 
belongs  together:  1)  Basil  speaks  of  the  grief 
caused  him  by  the  circulation  of  a  report  that  some 
of  his  suffragans  accepted  money  for  ordinations, 
and  states  that  he  does  not  yet  give  full  credence  to 
the  imputation.  2)  ITot  only  were  they  said  to  sell 
ordination,  but  also  to  excuse  their  action  on  the 
ground  of  religion,  which  implied  double  guilt; 
or  they  wrongly  considered  themselves  innocent 
because  they  received  payment  only  after  the 
performance  of  the  ceremony.  3)  The  arguments 
Basil  uses  against  simony  are:  a.  To  the  recipient 
of  a  bribe  he  applies  the  words  addressed  by 
Peter  to  Simon  Magus :  "  Keep  thy  money  to 
thyself  to  perish  with  thee."  ^^  h.  He  mentions 
the  spiritual  loss  which  the  seller  sustains,  c.  He 
■shows  the  base  character  of  the  action  by  which 
the  traffic  of  the  huckster  is  introduced  into  things 
spiritual,  d.  He  goes  to  the  source  of  the  sin, 
which  is  covetousness.  But  covetousness  is  the 
fountain-head  of  all  evil  and  called  idolatry,     e. 

^Ep.   53    (76),  PG.   32,   396-9;    Pitra,  Jur.   Ecc.   Graec. 
Hist,  et   Hon.  i,  608-9. 
"^  Acts,  VIII,  20. 


64  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

He  points  out  the  similarity  between  their  action 
and  that  of  Judas  in  betraying  Christ  for  a  bribe. 

4)  Basil  does  not  content  himself  with  warning 
and  pleading.  As  ruler  of  a  metropolitan  district, 
he  lays  do^vn  the  penalty  to  be  inflicted  for  further 
transgressions  on  this  point.  After  this  letter  of 
his,  any  offence  of  this  kind  will  be  punished  with 
deposition,  for  the  churches  of  God  have  not  the 
custom  of  buying  and  selling  God's  gift. 

Pope  Leo  the  Great  in  a  letter  written  January 
12,  444,  and  addressed  to  Anastasius,  bishop  of 
Thessalonica,  gives  him  the  following  directions: 
"  In  the  provinces  entrusted  to  you,  such  should 
be  consecrated  bishops  of  the  Lord  as  are  recom- 
mended only  by  a  virtuous  life  and  by  fidelity  to 
their  clerical  duties.  Exclude  all  influence  of  per- 
sonal favor,  ambition  and  purchased  votes."  "^ 

In  penning  the  above-mentioned  letter,  Basil,  as 
already  observed  by  Drey,^^  can  hardly  have  known 
the  following  so-called  canon  of  the  Apostles :  "  If 
any  bishop,  priest  or  deacon  obtain  possession  of  his 
dignity  with  money,  he  shall  be  deposed,  he  and 
the  one  who  ordained  him,  and  he  shall  be  abso- 
lutely deprived  of  communion  like  Simon  Magus 

""^Ep.  VI,  c.  3,  PL.  54,  618,  also  Mansi,  v,  1233.  See  also 
Ep.  CLXViii,  c.  1,  PL.  54,  1209-10. 

^  Neue  Untersuchungen  iiber  die  Konstitutionen  und 
Kanones  der  Apostel  (Tubingen,  1832),  355.  His  account 
of  the  letter  of  Basil  is  inaccurate. 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313   TO   476  65 

by  me  Peter."  -^  Chrysostom  also  fails  to  make 
use  of  the  canon  or  even  to  mention  it,  although 
he  had  occasion  for  doing  so.  Moreover,  the 
advanced  stage  of  development  which  its  wording 
indicates,  and  the  existence  of  the  circumstances 
which  it  implies,  point  to  a  rather  late  origin. 
Funk  -^  places  the  date  of  composition  at  the 
beginning  of  the  fifth  century.  He  rejects  as  in- 
sufficiently proved  Drey's  opinion,  which  sees  in  the 
canon  an  extract  of  the  second  canon  of  the  council 
of  Chalcedon  (451).^^  That  the  dependency  on 
Chalcedon  is  far  from  proved,  may  be  admitted 
with  Funk.  It  may  be  well  to  point  out  here 
the  error  committed  by  Drey,  when  in  trying  to 
establish  his  opinion,  he  tells  us  that  previous  to 
the  council  of  Chalcedon  no  historical  document 
can  be  found  proving  that  ordination  was  con- 
ferred for  money.  After  the  exposition  of  facts 
given  above,  the  reader  knows  what  to  think  of 
this  assertion.  On  the  other  hand,  however,  the 
position  of  Funk  that  a  later  date  than  the  begin- 
ning of  the  fifth  century  cannot  be  assigned  is 
not  quite  convincing.  It  is  known  that  Dionysius 
Exiguus  found  the  canon  in  existence  when  he 

^'Can.  30  (28),  Mansi,  i,  33;  Hefele,  Cg.  i,  809.  See 
Hefele,  New  French  ed.  I,  1203-21;  though  the  text  of  the 
canons    is   not   therein   given. 

^  Die  Apostolischen  Konstitutionen  (Rottenburg,  1891), 
187-91. 

=^Drey,   op.  cit.   355-56   and  411. 

5 


66  A   HISTORY   OF   SIMONY 

made  his  Latin  translation  of  the  Canons  of  the 
Apostles,  about  the  year  500.  Hence  the  canon 
in  question  may  be  considered  a  fifth  century  pro- 
duction, without  any  attempt  at  a  more  precise 
date. 

Two  other  Apostolic  canons  forbid,  one,  the 
acquisition  of  a  bishopric  through  the  influence 
of  the  secular  power, ^^  the  other,  nepotic  eleva- 
tions to  the  episcopate.^''^  At  a  period  of  greater 
development  of  the  simoniacal  idea  and  consequent 
legislation,  these  two  prohibitions  would  have  to  be 
spoken  of  more  at  length;  here  it  will  suffice  to 
have  mentioned  them. 

In  the  history  of  the  development  of  anti- 
simoniacal  legislation,  the  council  of  Chalcedon 
(451)  occupies  an  important  place.  In  its  canons 
we  find  the  first  great  ecclesiastical  amplification 
of  the  condemnation  of  simony  pronounced  by 
Peter.  The  accusations  against  Ibas  of  Edessa, 
which  were  again  examined  at  Chalcedon,  if  they 
did  not  cause  the  formulation  of  the  prohibition 
of  the  council,  at  least  drew  the  attention  of  the 
bishops  to  the  unlawful  traffic  in  sacred  objects. 
The  council  in  its  second  canon  decreed :  ^^ 

="Can.  31   (29),  Mansi,  I,  33;  Hefele,  I.  c. 

"Can.  76  (75),  Mansi,  i,  45.  This  canon  is  also  found 
among  the  canons  of  the  council  of  Antioeh  held  in  the 
year  341.  See  Hefele,  Cg.  i,  520,  823-4;  New  French  ed. 
I,  721. 

*8  Mansi,  vii,  357-60.  The  canon  has  been  incorporated 
in  the  Corpus  Jur.  Can.  c.  8,  Causa  I,  q.  1. 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313   TO   47  G  67 

"  If  any  bishop  should  confer  the  imposition  of 
hands  for  money  and  put  to  sale  a  grace  that  cannot 
be  sold;  if  for  money  he  should  ordain  a  bishop,  a 
chorepiscopus,  a  priest  or  deacon  or  some  other 
cleric;  or  if,  through  love  of  gain,  he  should  for 
money  nominate  a  steward,  advocate  or  prosmonarios, 
or  any  other  person  on  the  roll  of  the  Church,  he 
shall,  if  he  be  convicted,  forfeit  his  own  position 
and  the  ordained  party  shall  not  profit  by  this  venal 
ordination  or  appointment,  but  be  deprived  of  the 
dignity  or  office  he  obtained  for  money.  Should 
any  one  act  as  intermediary  in  these  shameful  and 
unlawful  transactions,  he  shall,  if  he  be  a  cleric, 
lose  his  own  position  and  if  he  be  a  layman  or  monk, 
he  shall  be  subject  to  anathema." 

As  had  previously  been  done  more  than  once, 
the  canon  pronounced  penalty  of  deposition  against 
ordainer  or  ordained  who  received  or  gave  payment 
for  ordination.  But  it  did  not  stop  there;  two 
new  classes  of  persons  were  considered:  1)  Church 
officials,  who  did  not  receive  ordination;  and  2) 
Intermediaries  in  simoniacal  transactions.  The 
penalty  pronounced  against  clergymen  was  now 
also  enacted  against  such  administrators  of 
church  property  (stewards),  advocates  or  counsels 
for  the  church,  or  other  officials,  as  obtained  their 
position  through  bribery:  they  were  to  be  dis- 
charged. It  cannot  be  stated  with  certainty  what 
was  the  function  of  the  "  prosmonarii  "  or  "  para- 


68  A  HISTORY   OF   SIMONY 

monarii,"  who  are  mentioned  with  the  stewards 
and  advocates.  According  to  some  writers,  the 
administration  of  church  property  also  devolved 
upon  them;  according  to  others,  they  were  a  sort 
of  ostiarii  or  janitors.-^  In  the  conclusion  of  the 
canon,  those  who  conduct  the  negotiations  in  the 
purchase  or  sale  of  an  ecclesiastical  position  are 
dealt  with.  They  are  distinguished  into  two 
classes,  according  as  they  are  either  clerics  or  lay 
persons.  The  former  incur  deposition ;  the  latter 
are  anathematized.  As  the  monks  of  the  time 
were,  with  few  exceptions,  laymen,  they  were 
subjected  to  the  same  penalty  as  these. 

The  stipulations  of  the  canon,  in  spite  of  their 
definite  character,  were  violated  at  an  early  date. 
Only  a  few  years  after  the  council  of  Chalcedon 
had  concluded  its  work,  a  synod  was  held  (459  or 
460)  at  Constantinople  under  the  presidency  of 
Gennadius  I,  then  patriarch  of  the  Imperial  City 
(c.  458-471).  The  cause  of  the  convocation  of 
this  synod  is  not  known.  We  know,  however,  that 
the  only  document  we  possess  of  it,  the  circular 
letter  regarding  simony,  was  issued,  as  the  letter 
itself  states,  owing  to  violations  of  the  law  of 
Chalcedon.^"  The  following  is  a  summary  of  the 
circular : 

°°  See  Percival,  The  Seven  Ecum.  Councils  (New  York, 
1900),  269.  (Vol.  XIV  of  the  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene 
Fathers. ) 

^"Hefele,    (Concgesch.   ii,   584-85),   had  some   misgivings 


FROM   THE   YEAR   313    TO   476  69 

Our  Lord,  when  He  sent  His  apostles  to  teach 
all  nations,  gave  them  the  command  to  freely  give 
as  they  had  freely  received,  as  earthly  treasures 
are  no  compensation  for  spiritual  gifts.  This 
command  was  not  intended  for  the  apostles 
alone,  but  also  for  those  who  succeeded  them. 
As  they  had  observed  it,  so  now  their  successors 
must  observe  it  and  not  sophisticate  where  soph- 
istry is  not  admissible.  The  law  is  clear :  "  Freely 
have  you  received,  freely  give."  It  is  as  if 
Christ  had  said :  "  You  received  the  sacerdotal 
dignity  from  me.  If  I  sold  it  to  you,  you 
also  may  sell  it;  but  if  freely  you  received, 
freely  also  you  should  give."  Woe  then  to  the 
person,  who,  for  money,  acquires  or  bestows  God's 
gift.  Hence  the  assembled  bishops  have  been  led 
to  renew  and  cite  the  second  canon  of  the  council 
of  Chalcedon,  which  banishes  all  satanical  invasion 
of  the  sjDiritual  realm  and  all  diabolical  efforts  in 
that  line,  and  excludes  the  giving  or  accepting  of 
money  both  before  and  after  ordination  or  pro- 
motion. In  spite  of  such  a  clear  condemnation, 
violations  of  the  law  have  been  discovered  in 
Galatia.  Consequently  the  renewal  of  the  pro- 
regarding  the  genuineness  of  this  writing,  but  withheld 
the  reasons  he  had  to  doubt.  It  must  be  confessed  that 
the  character  of  the  document  seems  to  indicate  a  later 
stage  of  development,  although  its  authenticity  is  generally 
admitted. 


70  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

visions  of  Chalcedon  is  appropriate,  so  that  this 
impious  habit  may  be  eradicated  and  the  grace  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  descend  from  above  on  the  candi' 
dates  for  ordination.  It  is  doubtful  vt^hether  the 
latter  receive  His  grace,  when  the  ordination  is 
performed  with  "  tainted  hands  or  whether  it  is 
not  rather  withdrawn." 

"  Be  it  therefore  known  to  your  holiness  (the 
metropolitan)  that  whosoever  will  be  detected  as 
guilty  in  this  matter,  be  he  a  bishop,  chorepiscopus, 
itinerant  ecclesiastic,  priest,  deacon  or  any  person 
soever  on  the  roll  of  the  Church,  or  from  among  the 
laity,  he  has  been  condemned  by  common  decree  and 
common  sentence  of  the  bishops,  as  was  already  done 
in  the  above-mentioned  canon  of  the  holy  Fathers. 
For  grace  must  always  be  grace  and  money  must 
not  intervene  (in  its  acquisition).  Therefore  pur- 
chaser and  seller  of  grace,  be  he  cleric  or  lay,  be  he 
convicted  of  guilt  or  not,  shall  be  deposed  from  his 
ecclesiastical  dignity  and  office  and  subject  to  ex- 
communication. For  God  and  mammon  cannot  be 
reconciled  and  those  who  serve  mammon  cannot  serve 
God.  The  pronouncement  of  the  Lord  cannot  be 
contradicted :  '  You  cannot  serve  God  and  mam- 
mon.' " 

In  conclusion,  directions  are  given  to  the  metro- 
politans to  make  the  letter  knovni  to  their  suffra- 
gans and  other  persons,  so  that  with  one  spirit 


FROM   THE   YEAR   313   TO   476  71 

and  one  soul,  all  may,  with  God's  help,  fight  the 
common  enemy,  avarice.  ^^ 

The  clear  prohibition  of  the  acceptance  of 
money,  either  "  before  or  after  ordination  or 
promotion  "  seems  to  indicate  that  the  important 
letter  of  Basil  was,  with  the  canons  of  Chalcedon, 
used  in  the  deliberations  of  the  synod.  The  doubt 
expressed  regarding  the  reception  of  grace  in  "  an 
ordination  performed  with  tainted  hands,"  already 
foreshadows  the  great  controversy  that  was  to 
agitate  subsequent  centuries,  whether  ordination 
thus  received  is  valid  or  not.^^  We  have  a  very 
curious  piece  of  legislation  in  the  wording  of  these 
penalties:  condemnation  is  pronounced  even 
against  those  guilty  of  simony,  but  not  convicted. 
This  may  mean  that  the  judges  have  certain 
knowledge,  but  no  legal  proofs,  of  the  guilt  of  the 
party,  and  pronounce  deposition.  Their  sentence 
in  such  a  case  will  be  reasonable,  but  will  hardly 
commend  itself  to  the  public  sense  of  justice.  The 
second  interpretation  that  may  be  given,  is  that 
the  simoniacal  person  incurs  deposition  and  excom- 
munication by  the  very  commission  of  simony, 
though  this  sin  be  absolutely  unknown  to  the 
ecclesiastical  authorities  and  the  faithful.  In  this 
case  the  administrative  acts  of  the  culprit  would 

"Mansi,  vii,  911-20. 

^  See    on   the   history   of   this   controversy,    Saltet,   Les 
R^ordinations    ( Paris,    1907). 


72  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

be  null,  but  there  would  be  no  authority  to  enforce 
the  penalty.  The  punishment  would  fall  not  only 
on  the  culprits  but  on  those  over  whom  they  are 
placed,  and,  as  is  easily  perceived,  would  be  the 
source  of  endless  confusion.  It  is  difficult  to  be- 
lieve that  this  second  meaning  was  intended,  but 
there  is  nothing  in  the  text  to  exclude  it  and  it  is 
more  obvious  than  the  first. 

The  imperial  government  seconded  the  efforts  of 
the  Church  against  simony.  The  emperor  of  the 
East,  Leo  I  (457-74),  issued  in  469  an  edict,  ad- 
dressed to  the  pretorian  prefect  Armasius  or 
Armatus,  which  reads :  ^^ 

"  If  any  one  is,  through  the  instrumentality  of 
God,  raised  to  the  episcopal  dignity,  either  in  this 
imperial  city  or  in  other  provinces,  which  extend 
over  the  whole  world,  let  his  election  proceed  from 
men's  purity  of  intention,  the  electors'  clean  con- 
science and  the  uncorrupted  judgment  of  all.  The 
episcopate  must  not  be  obtained  through  bargaining; 
but  each  candidate  should  be  judged  according  to  his 
deserts  and  not  according  to  his  material  means. 
What  place  can  be  secure,  what  object  inviolable, 
if  the  hallowed  temples  of  God  are  captured  with 
money?  Wliat  wall  of  integi'ity,  what  rampart  of 
faith  shall  we  provide,  if  the  cursed  greed  of  gold 
stealthily  invades  the  sacredness  of  the  sanctuary? 

''  Corp.  Jur.  Civ.  Cod.  Lib.  i.  Tit.  ill,  De  Episcopo  et 
Clerieis.  30    (31). 


FROM   THE   YEAR   313   TO   476  73 

What  can  be  out  of  danger,  what  secure,  if  the 
integrity  of  sanctity  is  corrupted?  Let  the  sacri- 
legious ardor  of  avarice  cease  from  menacing  the 
altars  and  let  this  crime  be  cast  out  of  the  sacred 
place.  In  our  times  then,  let  a  chaste  and  humble 
bishop  be  elected,  that,  wherever  he  appears,  the 
purity  of  his  life  may  be  an  object-lesson  in  every 
respect.  Not  money  but  prayers  shall  characterize 
his  ordination.  Ambition  must  be  so  far  removed 
from  him,  that  he  has  to  be  sought  out  for  the 
imposition  of  the  office,  that  he  opposes  a  refusal  to 
the  demand  and  flight  to  insistence.  Let  the  sole 
necessity  he  feels  of  declining  the  office  be  in  his 
favor.  For  he  is  utterly  unworthy  of  the  episcopate, 
unless  he  accept  it  reluctantly.  But  if  any  one  is 
known  to  have  come  into  possession  of  this  sacred 
and  holy  seat  of  the  pontiff,  through  pecuniary  in- 
fluence, or  to  have  accepted  a  remuneration  for  the 
ordination  or  election  of  another,  he  shall  be  tried 
for  public  crime  and  lese-majesty  and  deprived  of 
the  episcopal  dignity.  Nor  shall  he  thenceforward 
be  deprived  of  the  honor  only;  but  we  decree  that  he 
shall  be  condemned  also  to  perpetual  infamy.  Thus 
a  similar  penalty  will  be  inflicted  on  those  whom  an 
identical  crime  has  equally  dishonored." 

Only  a  few  years  later  (473),  an  edict  on  this 
same  subject,  was  issued  for  the  Western  Empire 
by  Glycerins.  It  was  addressed  to  the  pretorian 
prefect  of  Italy,  Himelco,  and  is  so  direct  and 


74  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

emphatic  that  it  too  deserves  to  be  quoted  in  its 
entirety :  ^^ 

"  Owing  to  a  warning  of  the  divine  majesty,  the 
object  that  claims  our  first  attention  at  the  beginning 
of  our  reign,  is  the  greater  reverence  which  should 
be  displayed  towards  the  most  holy  mysteries  of  the 
Christian  religion.  For  it  must  not  be  called  into 
question  that  the  purer  the  worship  which  the  inno- 
cence of  the  sacred  ministers  offers  to  the  deity,  the 
greater  the  favors  which  God,  the  Creator  of  the 
Universe,  confers  upon  the  created  world.  The  vices 
of  the  clerics  have  been  on  the  increase  for  a  long 
time,  and  when  we  were  yet  in  private  life,  we  already 
convinced  ourselves  that,  for  the  greatest  part,  the 
episcopate  is  not  obtained  through  merit,  but  bought 
with  money :  shameful  cupidity  had,  through  custom, 
already  made  this  practice  appear  lawful.  The 
zeal  for  the  possession  of  a  good  conscience  has 
become  extinct;  and  what  was  to  be  hoped  for  from 
God,  has  been  placed  within  the  reach  of  money 
and  exaction.  Thus  the  secular  power  of  the  bishops 
has  superseded  in  the  consideration  of  men  the  rever- 
ence due  to  their  ecclesiastical  office,  and  the  bishops 
themselves  have  a  more  lively  appreciation  for  civil 
honors.  Thus  it  happened  that,  neglecting  religion 
and  placing  themselves  under  the  protection  of  men, 
they  gave  more  attention  to  things  public  than  divine, 
and  escaped  the  punishment  due  to  their  faults  in 
consequence  of  the  very  permanency  of  their  sacred 

^PL.  56,  896-98. 


FROM   THE   YEAK  313   TO  476  75 

office.  Thus  they  were  led  to  appropriate,  system- 
atically and  under  the  semblance  of  real  administra- 
tion, the  revenues  of  the  churches.  To  disguise  the 
shamefulness  of  their  designs,  they  called  these 
revenues  the  riches  of  the  poor,  and  nevertheless  they 
distributed  immediate  rewards  to  some,  pledged 
themselves  in  writing  to  others,  and  sold  at  a  dis- 
advantage the  goods  destined  for  the  poor.  It  is 
for  this  reason,  we  believe,  that  the  offended  deity 
has  withdrawn  its  favors  from  us,  has  inflicted  upon 
us  so  many  evils  and  has  visited  the  Eoman  people 
with  the  many  calamities  which  have  befallen  us. 
For  with  what  mouth  or  what  impudence  does  he 
offer  his  supplications  to  the  Author  of  the  whole 
world,  who  has  been  elected  for  the  offering  up 
of  the  sacrifice,  not  through  the  judgment  of  the 
Holy  Trinity,  but  owes  his  promotion  to  the  favor 
of  men?  Or  what  will  such  bishops  not  con- 
sider venal,  who  have  made  a  traffic  of  the  sacred 
mysteries  ? 

"  Considering  these  reasons  we  have  sanctioned 
by  a  law  to  be  binding  forever,  that  whosoever  has 
obtained  the  episcopate  with  the  undue  help  of  other 
persons,  shall  possess  according  to  the  fashion  of  the 
world  what  he  acquired  acording  to  the  fashion  of 
the  world,  i.  e.,  after  the  lapse  of  a  year  he  will  be 
deprived  of  the  episcopate.  During  the  year  in 
which  he  holds  the  title  of  bishop,  an  imperial  com- 
missioner will  be  in  charge  of  the  administration  of 
ecclesiastical  revenues.  The  bishop  who  consecrated 
such  a  man  or  who  knew  that  money  was  given  or 


76  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

promised  to  any  one  by  the  candidate  for  consecra- 
tion, or  who  cleverly  feigned  ignorance  regarding 
the  character  of  the  person  striving  to  obtain  the 
episcopal  nomination,  not  by  a  pure  conscience 
but  by  despicable  payment,  shall  also  be  deprived 
of  the  episcopate,  paying  an  identical  penalty  for 
his  rash  consecration-act.  Not  only  churchmen, 
but  any  member  of  our  religion  is  entitled  to  a 
hearing  in  proceedings  against  this  secret  evil,  and 
those  who  can  substantiate  the  charge  will  receive, 
at  our  discretion,  a  reward  for  their  religious 
accusation.  The  inhabitants  of  any  city  who  are 
actuated  in  their  choice  of  the  candidates,  not  by 
personal  merits  which  should  be  attended  to,  but  by 
punishable  venality,  shall  incur  banishment  from 
their  coimtry,  which  they  so  ill  serve,  and  forfeit 
to  the  public  treasury  an  amount  of  their  fortunes 
equal  to  the  payment  received. 

"  Far,  therefore,^^  from  the  churches  such  base 
and  sacrilegious  auction;  let  the  brokers  cease  their 
work  in  such  shameful  transactions.  It  is  iniquitous 
to  sell  celestial  things  at  auction.  The  great  office 
of  the  episcopate,  as  it  has  been  said,  must  be 
solicited  not  with  money  but  by  merit;  and  accord- 
ing to  the  rule  of  the  ancient  Fathers,  the  number 
and  the  character  of  the  electors  should  be  taken 
into  consideration,  and  the  life  of  the  bishop-elect 
examined.  For  it  is  worthy  of  execration,  that  any 
one  acquiring  the  episcopal  rank  through  corruption 

°°Thi8  passage  is  corrupt;  we  give  what  we  consider  to 
be   the   correct   meaning. 


FROM   THE   YEAR  313   TO   476  77 

should,  even  before  he  takes  possession,  exhaust  the 
revenues  of  the  church  of  vrhich  he  should  be  the 
administrator  rather  than  the  possessor.  This  letter 
of  our  Serene  Highness  will,  in  our  opinion,  be  re- 
pressive of  the  designs  of  the  unrighteous  and  stir 
up  honest  men  to  greater  earnestness  in  the  pursuit 
of  virtue.  We  cannot  help,  Himelco,  dearest  and 
most  loving  relative,  expecting  surer  aid  from  the 
justice  and  mercy  of  God  Almighty,  when,  through 
bishops  of  innocent  and  proved  character,  we  will 
implore  His  omnipotent  help.  Hence  your  illus- 
trious and  exalted  Excellency  will,  through  the  whole 
extent  of  our  empire,  effect  the  announcement  and 
promulgation  of  this  law  of  Our  Serene  Highness, 
which  makes  for  the  amendment  of  the  bishops  and 
ministers  of  our  most  sacred  religion.  And  with 
our  august  hand  (we  add)  :  Farewell,  Himelco, 
dearest  and  most  loving  relative." 


CHAPTER  IV 

SIMONY    IN    THE    WEST    FROM    476    TO    590 

I.  Rome  and  Itaxy: — Conditions  at  Rome  during  the 
period  —  Intervention  of  Odoacer  in  papal  election  — 
The  election  of  Pope  Symmachus  —  The  designation  of 
Boniface  II  —  Vacancy  after  his  death  —  Election  of 
Silverius  —  Pope  Vigilius  —  Pelagius  I  —  Eucaristus 
and  the  bishopric  of  Volterra  —  Vitalis  of  Milan  — 
II.  France: — Clovis  and  his  sons  and  the  Church  — 
Quintianus  and  Apollinaria  and  the  see  of  Clermont  — 
Gallus  and  the  same  see  —  Cautinus  succeeds  Gallus  — 
The  successors  of  Cautinus  —  The  machinations  against 
Aetherius,  bishop  of  Lisieux  —  The  see  of  Rodez  and 
Transobadus  —  The  bishopric  of  Uzfes  and  the  civil 
government  —  King  Guntram  and  simony  —  Retrospect 
—  III.  Othee  Countries: — The  Vandals  and  the  Afri- 
can Church  —  Gildas  on  ecclesiastical  conditions  among 
the  Britons. 

I.     Rome  and  Italy 

One  of  the  causes  that  led  to  the  direct  inter- 
vention of  civil  rulers  in  the  designation  of 
successors  to  the  papacy  was  the  contested  papal 
elections.  These  were  not  infrequent  during  the 
period  now  under  consideration.  While  Italy 
was  in  the  hands  of  the  Ostrogoths,  there  existed 
at  Rome  a  party  favorable  to  these  new  rulers, 
which  tried  to  put  its  own  candidate  upon  the 

78 


FROM  THE  YEAR  476  TO  590  79 

papal  throne.  At  the  same  time  the  Komans  of 
the  old  stock  were  of  course  little  inclined  to  let 
such  a  dignity  pass  into  the  hands  of  persons  who 
were  in  their  eyes  little  short  of  barbarian.^ 

In  418  the  emperor  Honorius  intervened  in  the 
disputed  election  between  Boniface  I  and  Eulalius, 
and  finally  decided  in  favor  of  Boniface.  Pope 
Simplicius  (468-83)  even  looked  to  the  influence 
of  the  civil  authority  for  the  maintenance  of 
peace  in  the  Church  after  his  death,  as  appears 
from  the  following  incident.  Upon  his  demise 
(March,  483),  the  Roman  clergy  and  senate  met 
in  St.  Peter's  Church  for  the  election  of  a  suc- 
cessor. The  pretorian  prefect,  Basilius,  appeared 
at  the  meeting  as  the  representative  of  King 
Odoacer  and  cited  a  request  which  Simplicius  had 
made,  while  yet  alive,  to  his  royal  master.  The 
late  pontiff  had  demanded  that,  in  the  interest  of 
the  peace  of  the  Church,  there  should  be  no  election 
for  his  successor  until  the  civil  authority  had  been 
consulted.^  As  Thiol  observes,^  this  was  not  a 
claim  on  the  part  of  Odoacer  to  confirm  papal 
elections  on  principle ;  he  merely  contended  that 
he  had  been  asked  by  Simplicius  to  assure  a  peace- 


*See    Pfeilschifter,    Theoderich    der    Grosse,    172-73. 

' "  Si  eum  ( Simplicium )  de  hac  luce  transire  contigerit, 
non  sine  nostra  consultatione  cuiuslibet  celebretur  electio." 
Thiel,  Epp.  686  seq. 

"Op.  cit.  686,  n.  24. 


80  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

ful  election  at  his  demise.  It  is  not  recorded 
that  the  assembled  clergy  and  senate  protested 
against  this  action  of  Odoacer.  Felix  III  (or 
TI)  was  elected  (March,  483)  probably  with  the 
consent  of  the  king.  The  short  interval  between 
the  death  of  Simplicius  and  the  election  of  his 
successor  speaks  in  favor  of  harmony  between 
Odoacer  and  the  Romans. 

The  interference  of  the  civil  power  or  of  influ- 
ential laymen  in  papal  elections  was,  however, 
destined  to  turn  out  disadvantageously  in  many 
instances.  The  Roman  senator,  Festus,  during 
a  visit  which  he  made  to  Constantinople  during 
the  reign  of  the  emperor  Anastasius,  had  agreed 
with  him  to  obtain  the  consent  of  Pope  Anasta- 
sius II  to  the  "  Henoticon  "  of  the  emperor  Zeno. 
On  his  arrival  in  Rome  he  found  the  Pope  dead 
(November,  498).^  He  immediately  saw  his 
opportunity  in  the  forthcoming  election  and  used 
his  influence  and  wealth  to  procure  the  succession 
for  a  candidate  of  his  own  choice.  A  double 
election  took  place,  the  followers  of  Festus  setting 
up  Laurentius  in  opposition  to  the  pope-elect  Sym- 
machus.  As  peace  was  impossible  between  the 
two  contending  parties,  it  led  to  a  new  inter- 
vention  of   the   secular  power   in   papal    affairs. 

«Theodor.  Lector,  ii,  16,  17,  PG.  86,  1,  189  seqq.; 
Lib.  Pont.  I,  260  seqq.;  Tlieophanes,  Chronog.  Ad  ann. 
492,  493. 


FROM  THE  YEAR  476  TO  590  81 

King  Theodoric,  probably  appealed  to  by  both 
sides,  decided  with  great  fairness  in  favor  of  the 
candidate  who  had  obtained  the  larger  number  of 
votes  and  had  first  received  consecration.  Festus 
and  his  candidate  were  defeated.  The  success  of 
Symmachus  in  obtaining  a  favorable  royal  de- 
cision was  attributed  by  the  Laurentian  party  to 
bribery.^  A  divergency  of  opinion  exists  among 
modem  writers  as  to  whether  there  was  any  actual 
foundation  for  the  accusation.  Duchesne  ^  and 
Grisar  '^  assert  that  it  was  sheer  calumny ;  Hart- 
mann  ^  is  strongly  inclined  to  admit  the  truth  of 
the  charge ;  while  Pf eilschif ter  ^  unhesitatingly, 
and  it  would  seem  rightly,  declares  that  money 
played  a  part  in  obtaining  the  royal  confirmation 
at  Kavenna.  While  the  author  of  the  Laurentian 
fragments  is  untrustworthy,  the  same  cannot  be 
said  of  Ennodius,  who  asserts  that  more  than  4000 
gold  solidi  (about  $1,250)  were  distributed  among 
persons  of  infiuence  at  court. ^^  Ennodius's  bishop, 
more  probably  Laurentius  of  Milan, ^^  advanced 
the  money  under  guarantee  of  repayment  by 
the  Apostolic  See.  In  spite  of  the  repeated 
demands    of    Ennodius,    the    sum    had    not    been 

^Lib.   Pont.   I,   44.  'Lib.  Pont,  i,  263,  n.  5. 

'  Gesch.  Roms.  i,  721.  *  Gesch.  Ital.  i,  143. 

*  TJieoderich,  57. 
"Ennodius,  Epp.  Ill,    10,  MGE.  Auct.   Ant.   vil,   83  ed. 

Vogel     (Berlin,    1885). 
"  Pfeilschiiter,  I.  c.  n.  7. 

6 


82  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

refunded  about  the  year  50Y.^^  The  names  of 
the  persons  who  had  accepted  payment  were  not 
unknown  to  Ennodius ;  but  he  did  not  deem  it  safe 
to  mention  them  in  his  letter.  Whoever  they  may 
have  been,  it  is  certain  that  King  Theodoric 
emerged  from  the  affair  with  clean  hands  and 
without  having  been  influenced  by  any  of  his 
subordinates.^^  It  may  be  added  also  that  those 
who  made  the  distribution  hardly  considered  it 
objectionable,  as  appears  from  the  edict  of  King 
Athalarich,  issued  shortly  after. ^^ 

Symmachus,  out  of  consideration  for  his  oppo- 
nent, appointed  Laurentius  to  the  bishopric  of 
ISTuceria.  Festus,  however,  made  another  attempt 
to  deprive  Symmachus  of  his  office  by  bringing 
baseless  criminal  charges  against  him;  this  also 
ended  in  failure. 

Pope  Felix  IV  (III)  (526-30)  owed  his  final 
success  in  obtaining  the  paj^al  dignity  to  the  sup- 
port of  Theodoric.  ^^  A  few  days  before  his 
death,  he  designated,  in  presence  of  high  civil 
and  ecclesiastical  personages,  his  own  successor  in 
the  person  of  the  archdeacon  Boniface.  The 
reasons  for  this  action  were  set  forth  in  the  papal 

^Ennodius,  ed,  cit.  223,  229,  Epp.  vi,  16,  vi,  33. 
"  Pfeilschifter,  op.  cit.  57,  58. 
"  Cassiod.  Variae,  ix,  15. 

"  Cassiod.  Variae,  Lib.  Vlli,  Ep.  15,  MGH.  Auct.  Ant.  Xll, 
246,  ed.  Mommsen. 


FROM  THE   YEAR  476  TO  590  83 

edict,  which  brought  the  designation  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  Roman  people.  The  church  treasury 
was  empty.  It  could  not  bear  the  expenses  of  a 
new  electoral  campaign,  in  which  the  candidates 
would  outbid  one  another  in  promises  of  distri- 
bution of  money  or  similar  engagements ;  and  it 
was  with  ecclesiastical  revenues  that  such  promises 
were  usually  redeemed. -^^  Very  probably  political 
considerations  also  played  a  part  in  this  nomina- 
tion of  the  first  pope  of  Germanic  ancestry. 
This  appears  the  more  likely  from  the  fact  that 
when  Boniface  II,  the  candidate  designated  by 
Felix,  assumed  succession,  the  majority  of  the 
clergy  and  senate  elected  the  Greek  deacon  Dios- 
corus  in  opposition  to  him.  The  danger  of  a 
schism  was  averted  only  by  the  timely  death  of 
Dioscorus  shortly  after  his  appointment  (October 
14,  530).^^  Boniface  II,  now  universally  recog- 
nized, obliged  the  ecclesiastical  partisans  of  his 
late  rival  to  sign  a  decree  condemning  Dioscorus. 
It  has  been  asserted  by  different  writers  ^®  that 
Dioscorus  was  anathematized  for  simony.  But 
this  contention  cannot  be  substantiated.  The 
letter  of  Justinian  appealed  to  in  support  of  the 
statement  does  not  speak  of  a  simoniacal  trans- 

^^  See   Hartmann,   GescJi.  Italiens,  I,  237. 
"Lib.  Pont.  I,  281. 

"  Baronius,    Ad    an.    530,    nos.    2-4;    Diet.    Christ.    Biog. 
s.  V.  Boniface,  II. 


84  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

action.  ISTor  does  the  official  text  of  the  condemna- 
tion which  we  now  possess  make  the  least  mention 
of  simony.  ^^ 

As  to  the  long  vacancy  which  occurred  after 
the  death  of  Boniface  II  (from  October  17,  532,  to 
January  2,  533),  it  was  caused  by  a  heated  elec- 
toral campaign  and  simoniacal  intrigues.  The 
canvassing  and  bidding  for  votes  was  carried  on 
with  such  activity  that  the  ordinary  church  funds 
were  exhausted,  and  sacred  vessels  were  put  up  for 
sale  in  order  to  cover  the  expenses  of  the  contest.^*' 
John  II  finally  secured  the  succession.  To  sup- 
press such  abuses  as  these,  the  Gothic  government 
issued  the  prohibitions  spoken  of  elsewhere. 

After  the  brief  reigns  of  John  II  (533-35)  and 
Agapitus  (535-36),  Silverius  (536-37)  who  was 
a  subdeacon  and  son  of  Pope  Hormisdas,  was 
elected  with  the  help  of  King  Theodat.  Anasta- 
sius  in  the  Liher  Pontificalis  tells  us  that 
Silverius  obtained  the  office  by  bribing  the  king. 
But  this  statement  should  not  be  admitted  without 
reserve,  for  Anastasius  is  the  only  authority  for 
it.  The  nomination  of  a  mere  subdeacon  was 
against  Roman  custom  and  must  have  aroused 
opposition.     The  chronicler  of  the  history  of  the 

"  Lib.  Pont.  I,  282,  n.  8 ;  Duchesne,  La  Succession  du 
Pape  F6lix  IV  in  Melanges  de  I'Ecole  FranQaise  de  Rome 
(Rome,  1883). 

^Lib.  Pont.  I,  283,  n.  16;   Cassiod.   Variae,  ix,   15. 


FROM  THE   YEAR  476  TO  590  85 

popes  denounces  Theodat  vehemently,  probably 
in  stronger  language  than  was  warranted  by  the 
facts.  Such  a  proceeding  is  not  unusual  among 
historical  writers  under  similar  circumstances. 
Moreover,  it  is  not  the  only  instance  of  its  kind 
met  with  in  the  Liber  Pontificalis.  The  account 
which  Liberatus  ^^  gives  of  the  same  event  cer- 
tainly does  not  show  the  slightest  trace  of  the 
great  strife  which  is  supposed  to  have  divided 
Rome  at  the  death  of  Agapitus.  He  simply  tells 
us  that  "  when  the  news  of  the  death  of  the  pope, 
who  died  at  Constantinople,  reached  Rome,  the 
city  elected  the  subdeacon  Silverius,  son  of  the 
former  pope  Hormisdas."  We  must  be  cautious 
then  in  admitting  the  charge  of  simony  brought 
against  Silverius.  As  Duchesne  remarks,  we 
here  have  "  one  of  those  accusations  so  readily 
put  forward  by  partisan  feeling  because  its  veri- 
fication is  most  frequently  impossible."  ^^ 

At  the  death  of  Agapitus,  the  empress  Theo- 
dora seems  to  have  lost  no  time  in  seizing  the 
opportunity  to  secure  the  appointment  of  a  pope 
favorable  to  Monophysitism.  She  found  her  can- 
didate in  Vigilius,  a  deacon  of  Agapitus.  Vigilius 
was  promised  the  papacy  and  seven  "  centenaria," 
if  he  consented  to  the  disapproval  of  the  council 
of    Chalcedon    and    to    the    confirmation    of    the 

'^Breviar.  c.  22,  PL.  68,  1039. 
''Lib.  Pont.  I,  293,  n.  2, 


86  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

doctrine  of  the  deposed  Monophysite  patriarchs, 
Anthimus  (Constantinople),  Theodosius  (Alex- 
andria) and  Severus  (Ephesiis).  Vigilius,  influ- 
enced "  by  the  love  of  the  episcopate  and  of 
gold,"  ^^  gladly  acceded  to  the  proposition.  But 
on  his  arrival  in  Rome  from  the  East  he  found 
that  Silverius  had  already  been  consecrated  pope. 
He  asked,  nevertheless,  for  the  cooperation  of 
Belisarius  in  the  realization  of  his  plans.  The 
great  general,  who  was  then  waging  war  on  the 
Goths  in  Italy,  was  promised  two  "  centenaria  " 
of  gold,^^  if  he  would  procure  him  the  papal  office. 
The  timely  death  of  Pope  Silverius  (537)  per- 
mitted of  an  early  execution  of  the  scheme.  Vigi- 
lius, who  had  already  been  consecrated  during  the 
lifetime  of  Silverius,  was  now  recognized  as 
legitimate  pope  by  the  Roman  clergy.  Once  in 
possession  of  the  coveted  position,  he  did  not  show 
himself  anxious  to  fulfil  all  the  engagements  he 
had  entered  into.  He  never  approved  Monophysi- 
tism.  Belisarius,  however,  was  duly  rewarded 
for  his  services."^  In  the  controversy  of  the  Three 
Chapters,  it  was,  according  to  Eacundus  of  Her- 
miane,^*^  venality  that  prompted  Vigilius  to  issue 
the  Judicatum  (April  11,  548).     But  the  author- 

=»Liberat.  Breviar.  c.  22,  PL.  I.  c.  1040. 
**  Liberat.  Breviar.  c.  22,  PL.  I.  c. 
^  Liberat.  Breviar.  ibid,  et  seqq. 
'^  Liber  contra  Mociarmm,  PL.  67,  861. 


FROM  THE   YEAR  476  TO  590  87 

ity  of  the  passionate  Faciindus  is  not  sufficient 
guarantee  for  the  unqualified  admission  of  the 
truth  of  the  charge.  Yet  it  will  be  well  to  re- 
member with  Duchesne,^'^  that  Vigilius  "  has 
always  been  reproached  for  being  fond  of  money." 

It  was  to  the  civil  power  that  Pope  Pelagius  I 
(556-61),  whose  case  will  be  more  appropriately 
discussed  in  the  chapter  on  anti-simoniacal  legis- 
lation, owed  his  elevation  to  the  papacy.  The 
civil  authority,  on  the  contrary,  was  in  no  way 
concerned  with  the  election  and  consecration  of  his 
namesake  Pelagius  II,  who  brings  us  down  to  the 
year  590.  ISTo  imperial  confirmation  was  sought 
for  in  his  case  because,  as  the  chronicler  explains,^^ 
Rome  was  then  besieged  by  the  Lombards.  The 
fact  that  an  explanation  is  offered  for  the  absence 
of  the  emperor's  confirmation  shows  how  natural 
and  how  well-established  a  custom  it  already  was 
for  the  Romans  to  look  for  civil  approval  in  all 
papal  elections. 

Historical  records,  such  as  we  have  them,  speak 
of  but  few  instances  of  simony  in  the  rest  of  Italy 
during  the  period.  At  a  synod  held  in  496,  Pope 
Gelasius  decided  the  case  between  Eucaristus,  a 

^  Rev.  des  quest,  hist,  xxxvi  (1884),  402,  note.  The 
whole  art.  "  Vigile  et  P6lage."  runs  from  369-440.  It 
was  answered  by  Dom  F.  Chamard,  Rev.  des  quest,  hist. 
xxxvn  (1885),  540-78.  Duchesne  replied,  Ibid.  579-93. 
L6veque,   Etude  sur   le  Rape   Vigile,    (Amiens,    1887). 

"^Lib.  Pont.  I,  309. 


88  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

former  pretender  to  the  episcopal  see  of  Volterra, 
and  Faustus  a  "  defensor  "  of  the  Roman  Church. 
Eucaristus  had  paid  Faustus  63  solidi  to  he  ex- 
pended in  securing  for  him  the  bishopric  of  Vol- 
terra,  a  transaction  which  Faustus  had  duly 
acknowledged  by  handing  over  a  receipt  to  the 
payer.  Eucaristus's  life  and  conduct  proved  an 
obstacle  to  the  conferring  on  him  of  the  honor; 
but  he  now  demanded  that  his  money  be  refunded. 
Faustus,  while  admitting  that  he  had  received  the 
money,  claimed  to  have  expended  it  according  to 
the  wish  of  the  giver.  It  was  duly  established 
in  presence  of  the  "  curiales  "  of  Volterra  that  31 
solidi  and  2  tremisses  were  paid  to  Faustus  specifi- 
cally for  his  mission  {ad  eius  delegationem) . 
Out  of  this  sum  22  solidi  and  2  tremisses  were  used 
to  cover  the  expenses  of  the  curiales  engaged  in 
the  case.  Eucaristus,  however,  could  not  be 
elected  to  the  see  of  Volterra ;  for  he  was  publicly 
known  to  be  a  parricide  and  was  also,  according 
to  his  own  confession,  a  forger.  The  nine  re- 
maining solidi  were  spent  to  exonerate  Eucaristus 
from  the  crime  imputed  to  him.  The  expenditure 
of  all  these  funds  was,  therefore,  considered  to  have 
been  made  in  the  interest  of  Eucaristus  and  with 
his  approval.  Faustus  was  declared  innocent,  and 
the  receipt  in  Eucaristus's  possession  was  to  be 
immediately  returned  to  him.     As  long  as  it  was 


FROM  THE   YEAR  476  TO  590  89 

detained  by  the  sham  bishop  it  would  be  null  and 
void.^® 

In  the  proceedings  which  gave  a  certain  Vitalis 
the  episcopal  see  of  Milan  in  552,  there  was  more 
imperial  favor  than  any  genuine  election.  The 
consonance  of  the  candidate's  ideas  with  imperial 
views  on  the  theological  discussions  of  the  time, 
rather  than  real  merit,  raised  him  to  episcopal 
honors,  l^arses  acted  as  the  emperor's  repre- 
sentative on  that  occasion,  and  his  conduct  in  the 
matter  received  the  warm  approval  of  Pope 
Pelagius  shortly  afterwards. ^° 

II.     Simony  in  France. 

The  strength  of  the  royal  power  and  the  Ger- 
manic religious  ideas  forced  the  Church  to  leave 
in  the  hands  of  the  kings  more  authority  in  re- 
ligious affairs  than  they  were  entitled  to  in  virtue 
of  their  position.  This  politico-religious  authority 
in  the  hands  of  half-barbarian  rulers  opened  the 
door  to  intrigue  and  bribery;  simony  was,  there- 
fore, rampant  under  the  Merovingian  kings.     ITo 

^Lowenfeld,  Epistolae  Pont.  Rom.  Ineditae,  nos.  9,  22 
(Leipzig,  1885);  Ewald,  Die  Papstbriefe  der  Brit.  Samm- 
lung,  Neues  Archiv,  v  (1880),  nos.  14,  45,  58,  63,  64 
and  pp.  526-33. 

°°Jaff6,  1038;  PL.  69,  395;  Duchesne,  Rev.  quest,  hist. 
XXXVI    (1884),  432. 


90  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

instance  of  it  is  recorded  during  the  reign  of 
Glovis  (481-511),  the  first  Christian  king  of  the 
Franks.  But,  as  has  been  pointed  out  by  Loe- 
bell,^^  a  ruler  who  had  first  embraced  the  faith 
himself  and  then  assured  its  triumph  to  a  great 
extent  among  his  people,  would  naturally  be  most 
readily  listened  to  by  the  clergy  even  in  ecclesi- 
astical affairs.  When  Bishop  Remigius  of  Rheims, 
who  had  converted  him,  was  violently  attacked  by 
his  fellow-bishops,  Heraclius  of  Paris,  Leo  of 
Sens  and  Theodosius  of  Auxerre,  because  of  the 
ordination  of  an  unworthy  priest,  Claudius,  the 
bishop  answered  in  a  letter  written  about  510, 
that  he  had  ordained  this  priest  not  for  reward, 
but  upon  the  injunction  of  the  most  excellent 
king,  the  propagator  and  defender  of  the  Catholic 
f  aith.^^  At  the  same  time,  he  gave  those  to  whom 
he  addressed  his  letter  to  understand  that  their 
own  nomination  had  not  been  entirely  free  from 
royal  influence.  ^^  Shortly  before  his  death,  Clovis 
convoked  a  council,  which  met  at  Orleans  on  July 
10th,  511.  It  forbade  abbots,  priests  and  all 
clerics  and  monks  to  solicit  benefices  from  princes, 
without  previous  examination  or  recommendation 
by  the  bishop.  The  violation  of  the  prohibition 
was  to  be  punished  with  deposition  and  the  priva- 

"  Oregor  von  Tours,   337-8. 

^  Bouquet,  iv,  52. 

^  See  Vacandard,  Etudes  de  Critique,  128-29. 


FROM  THE  YEAR  476  TO  590  91 

tion  of  communion  until  such  time  as  satisfactory 
penance  would  be  performed. ^^  The  enactment 
was  not  only  conducive  to  the  elimination  of  ap- 
pointments due  to  the  patronage  of  the  powerful; 
it  also  tended  to  reduce  the  presentation  of  gifts 
en  the  occasion  of  nominations  to  ecclesiastical 
positions.  For  according  to  the  received  notions 
of  the  northern  nations,  as  Lingard  ^^  has  observed, 
the  inferior  blushed  to  approach  the  throne  of  his 
superior  without  a  present.  A  mere  donation 
has,  of  course,  nothing  to  do  with  simony.  But 
princes  at  an  early  date  exacted  as  some  sort  of 
a  debt  what  had  been  at  the  beginning  sponta- 
neously offered.  Ecclesiastical  writers  of  the 
period  usually  speak  with  disapprobation  of  the 
presentation  of  gifts  on  the  occasion  of  ecclesi- 
astical appointments.  Such  action  must  have 
awakened  in  their  minds  the  idea  of  exchange 
or  at  least  undue  relation  between  the  earthly 
donation  and  the  spiritual  preferment. 

The  power  which  their  father  had  exercised  over 
religious  affairs,  the  sons  of  Clovis  were  not  to  let 
slip  from  their  hands  when  they  began  to  reign 
over  his  divided  dominions.  But  his  disinter- 
estedness was  not  very  scrupulously  imitated  by 
them.  Gregory  of  Tours,  speaking  of  the  period 
during  which  they  reigned,  tells  us  that  it  was  a 

»*Can,  vii,  Maassen,  Concilia,  i;   Hefele,  ll,  662-63. 
'^Anglo-Saxon  Antiq.  105. 


92  A   HISTOEY    OF    SIMONY 

time,  when  "  bishoprics  were  sold  by  princes  and 
bought  by  clerics."  ^^  Gregory  goes  to  special 
pains  in  giving  us  details  of  affairs  in  his  native 
Auvergne.  He  tells  us  that  on  the  death  of 
Eufrasius,  the  bishop  of  Clermont,  in  515,  the 
people  elected  Quintianus,  a  native  of  Africa  and 
former  bishop  of  Rodez,  who,  driven  from  his 
episcopal  see  by  the  Goths  owing  to  his  friendli- 
ness to  the  Franks,  had  taken  refuge  in  Clermont. 
But  the  popular  decision  was  to  be  modified  and 
the  succession  to  go  to  Apollinaris,  the  son  of 
Sidonius  Apollinaris.  Placidina,  the  wife  of  the 
Apollinaris  who  was  to  supplant  Quintianus,  and 
Alchima,  his  sister,  called  upon  the  bishop-elect 
and  besought  him  to  abandon  the  office  to  their 
relative.  Quintianus,  already  advanced  in  years 
and  not  very  desirous  of  again  throwing  himself 
into  the  activities  of  diocesan  government,  con- 
sented to  step  aside  in  favor  of  Apollinaris.  The 
two  women  now  despatched  the  latter  to  Theo- 
doric,  king  of  Austrasia  and  part  of  Southern 
France  (511-33/34).  Apollinaris  saw  the  king, 
made  a  generous  presentation  of  gifts  and  obtained 
the  bishopric.  He  died,  however,  three  or  four 
months  after  his  appointment.  When  the  news  of 
his  demise  reached  Theodoric,  he  ordered  Quinti- 
anus to  be  created  bishop  of  Clermont,  remarking : 

^Vitae  Pair,  vi,  3,  in  MGH.  8S.  Rer.  Mer.  i,  682. 


FROM  THE   YEAR  476  TO  590  93 

"  His  love  for  us  has  caused  this  man  to  be  driven 
from  his  see."  The  king's  legates  convoked  the 
bishops  of  the  province  and  the  people  of  the 
city,  and  Quintianus  was  made  bishop  of  Cler- 
mont.^^  The  inhabitants  saw  nothing  inappro- 
priate in  this  royal  action. 

When  they  elected  a  successor  to  Quintianus  in 
525,  the  king  altogether  ignored  their  choice. 
Gregory  of  Tours  tells  us  that  his  uncle  Gallus, 
"  through  the  king's  favor,  filled  the  vacancy."  ^^ 
Gallus  had  lived  for  some  time  at  the  court  of 
Theodoric  where  he  was  held  in  great  esteem 
both  by  the  king  and  the  queen.  ^^  At  the  time 
of  Quintianus's  death,  he  happened  to  be  sojourn- 
ing at  Clermont.  The  inhabitants  met  at  the 
house  of  the  priest  Impetratus  and  discussed  at 
much  length  the  question  of  the  succession,  with- 
out arriving  at  any  definite  conclusion.  After 
their  departure,  Gallus  favored  with  divine  in- 
spiration according  to  Gregory,  remarked  to  a 
cleric,  Viventius  by  name :  "  To  what  purpose  all 
this    bustle    and    these    discussions.     I    will    be 

^^  Hist.  Franc,  iii,  2,  MOH.  88.  Rer.  Mer.  i,  109-10; 
Vitae  Patrum,  c.  iv,  ibid.  674-75.  For  this  and  subsequent 
events  see  also  Hauck,  Die  Bischofswahlen  unter  den  Merow. 
and  Vacandard,  Les  Elections  Episc.  sous  les  M6rov.  in 
Rev.  quest,  hist.  (1898),  Lxni,  321-83,  reprinted  with  modi- 
fications in  the  author's  Etudes  de  crit.  (Paris,  1906),  123- 
87.     The  case  of  Apollinaris  is  treated  in  the  Etudes,  132. 

^  Hist.  Franc,  iv,  5.  ^  Vitae  Pat.  vi,  2. 


94  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

bishop.  As  for  yourself,  when  you  hear  of  my 
return  from  my  visit  to  the  king,  meet  me  with 
my  predecessor's  horse  prepared  for  me.  Your 
disregard  of  my  injunction  may  occasion  you  much 
regret  in  the  future."  At  these  words,  Viventius 
flew  into  such  a  passion  that  he  dashed  Gallus 
against  the  bedstead  upon  which  he  was  reclining 
and  wounded  his  side.  After  this  rather  un- 
pleasant encounter  and  the  departure  of  the  pugna- 
cious cleric,  Impetratus  advised  Gallus  to  journey 
to  the  royal  court  and  inform  the  king  of  the 
death  of  Quintianus  and  the  happenings  at  Cler- 
mont. "  Divine  inspiration,"  he  added,  "  might 
prompt  him  to  confer  the  bishopric  on  you;  if 
not,  it  will  be  a  recommendation  for  you  with 
the  appointee."  Gallus  repaired  to  the  court  and 
during  his  sojourn  there,  Aprunculus,  bishop  of 
Treves,  also  died.  The  clergy  of  this  city  applied 
to  Theodoric  for  Gallus  as  their  bishoj).  The  king 
refused  on  the  ground  that  he  destined  him  for 
another  see;  I^icetus  was  then  made  bishop  of 
Treves.  A  deputation  from  the  clergy  of  Cler- 
mont who  had  elected  another  than  Gallus  now 
appeared  at  court  and,  with  a  large  number  of  pres- 
ents, requested  the  king  to  confirm  their  choice. 
The  king  declined,  and  informed  them  that  Gallus 
would  be  their  bishop.  Being  as  yet  only  a 
deacon,  he  was  ordained  to  the  priesthood  and 
the  king  gave  a  public  banquet  in  honor  of  the 


FROM  THE   YEAR  476  TO  590  95 

future  bishop.  Referring  to  this  event,  Gallus 
was  later  wont  to  say  that  the  episcopate  had  only 
cost  him  the  "  treans  "  which  he  gave  as  a  gratuity 
to  the  cook  who  had  prepared  the  dinner.  The 
fact  that  Gallus  was  received  with  enthusiasm  by 
the  inhabitants  of  his  episcopal  city  shows  that 
they  did  not  even  think  of  protesting  against  the 
action  of  the  king.'*'^ 

At  the  death  of  Gallus  in  553,  Cato  was  desig- 
nated by  the  popular  vote  as  his  successor.  The 
archdeacon  Cautinus,  whose  relations  with  the 
newly  elected  candidate  had  been  of  the  most 
harmonious  character,  offered  to  obtain  for  him 
without  remuneration,  the  final  sanction  of  the 
king.  All  he  demanded  was  the  enjoyment  of  the 
prospective  bishop's  favor.  The  latter  declining 
his  services,  Cautinus  proceeded  to  the  court  of 
King  Theodobald  (548-55),  informed  him  of  the 
death  of  Gallus  and  showed  no  reluctance  to 
accepting  a  nomination  for  himself.  The  king 
called  a  meeting  of  bishops  at  Metz  (of  what 
jDrovince  we  are  not  told),  and,  before  the  messen- 
gers of  Cato  reached  the  city,  Cautinus  received 
episcopal  consecration.  The  failure  to  take  into 
consideration  the  expression  of  the  will  of  the 
people  had  disastrous  results  in  this  instance. 
Cautinus    proved    to    be    an    unworthy    bishop, 

^Vitae  Pat.  vi,  3;   Vacandard,  Etudes  de  crit.  134. 


96  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

avaricious,  and  addicted  to  drink.  The  strength 
of  four  men,  Gregory  of  Tours  tells  us,  was  on 
several  occasions  hardly  sufficient  to  carry  him 
from  table  in  a  state  of  intoxication.  Cato  re- 
fused to  submit  to  him  and  had  his  followers. 
He  intrigued  to  oust  Cautinus  and  take  his  place. 
Profiting  by  his  friendship  with  Chramnus,  the 
son  of  the  then  reigning  king  Clothaire,  he  entered 
into  an  agreement  with  him  that,  if  the  king  were 
to  die,  Cautinus  should  be  immediately  turned 
out  of  his  see  and  Cato  put  in  his  place.  On 
another  occasion  he  paid  a  woman  to  proclaim  in 
church,  as  if  under  divine  inspiration,  his  great- 
ness and  holiness,  and  to  revile  Cautinus  as  guilty 
of  all  crimes  and  unworthy  of  the  episcopate.  ^^ 
But  his  exertions  were  of  no  avail,  and  by  the 
time  that  death  deprived  Cautinus  of  his  see 
(c.  571),  Cato  had  already  succumbed. 

IsTumerous  were  those  who  contended  for  the 
vacancy,  many  were  the  gifts  they  offered  and 
substantial  the  promises  they  made.  Eufrasius, 
a  priest  and  son  of  the  former  senator  Euvodius, 
lacking  the  merit  requisite  for  the  position,  tried 
to  obtain  it  through  bribery.  Having  procured 
a  considerable  sum  of  money  from  some  Jews,  he 
sent  it  to  the  king  through  his  kinsman  Beregi- 
silus.     He  failed,   however,  to  obtain  the  nomi- 

"Greg.    Hist.    Franc.   Lib.    iv,    5-7,    11-12,    15. 


FROM  THE   YEAR  476  TO  590  97 

nation.  The  clergy  of  Clermont  elected  the 
archdeacon  Avitus,  who  had  made  no  promises 
to  his  electors,  and  the  king  sanctioned  their  choice. 
An  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  count  of  Clermont, 
Firminus,  to  delay  the  consecration  of  the  bishop- 
elect  was  not  successful.  The  count's  friends, 
who  journeyed  in  his  stead  to  the  royal  court, 
offered  the  king  1000  pieces  of  gold  for  one  week's 
delay  in  the  consecration  of  Avitus.  Eufrasius, 
according  to  Eoth,"*-  was  at  the  bottom  of  this 
scheme.  The  statement  is  not  devoid  of  all  proba- 
bility, but  the  passage  of  Gregory  of  Tours,  cited 
to  substantiate  it,  does  not  clearly  convey  that 
meaning.  At  all  events,  the  king  declined  to  with- 
hold even  for  a  few  days  his  approbation  of  the 
selection  of  Avitus,  and  the  latter  was  consecrated 
at  Metz.-^^ 

Our  information  on  ecclesiastical  affairs  in 
Gallic  dioceses  other  than  Clermont,  is  frequently 
scant  and  incomplete  during  this  period;  yet  a 
few  more  instances  may  be  recorded  in  which 
money  played  a  part  in  the  attempted  or  actual 
acquisition  of  spiritual  advantages.  About  560  a 
certain  Aetherius  was  bishop  of  Lisieux  in  Nor- 
mandy. According  to  Gregory  of  Tours,  he  was 
a  man  more  remarkable  for  his  excessive  clemency 
than  for  his  prudence.     He  had  twice  intervened 

*^  Beneficialwesen,  270,  n.  103. 
"Hist.  Franc.   TV,  35. 

7 


98  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

in  favor  of  a  disreputable  cleric  and  saved  his 
life.  In  return  for  these  services,  the  cleric  com- 
bined with  an  archdeacon  of  the  city  against  the 
bishop.  They  formed  a  plot,  the  object  of  vv^hich 
w^as  the  assassination  of  Aetherius  and  the  sub- 
stitution of  the  criminal  cleric.  They  canvassed 
the  city  offering  rewards  to  their  supporters ;  but 
their  scheme  ended  in  failure  because  at  the  last 
moment  courage  deserted  the  assassin  who  had  been 
hired  to  deliver  the  death-blow.  ]!^ot  only  did  he 
abstain  from  executing  his  murderous  design,  but 
he  even  made  a  full  confession  to  the  bishop.'** 

On  the  death  of  Dalmatius,  bishop  of  Rodez  (c. 
580),  there  were  as  usual,  writes  Gregory  of  Tours, 
many  competitors  for  his  place.  Chief  among 
these  was  the  priest  Transobadus.  This  ecclesi- 
astic entertained  the  clergy  of  the  city  at  dinner, 
not  out  of  any  desire  to  promote  their  bodily 
welfare  and  social  pleasure,  but  because  he  wished 
to  dispose  them  favorably  to  his  own  episcopal  aspi- 
rations and  thus  gain  their  votes.  In  spite  of  these 
efforts,  the  office  went  to  the  archdeacon  of  Rodez, 
Theodosius."*^  The  latter's  rule  was  of  short 
duration;  he  died  in  583,  and  a  new  opportunity 
thus  presented  itself  to  Transobadus  to  seek  the 

*^Eist.  Franc,  vi,  36;  Gallia  Christ,  xi,  763-64;  Fisquet, 
La  France  Pontificale,  M4tropole  de  Rouen,  Bayeux  et 
Lisieux,  223-24. 

"Hist.  Franc,  v,  46. 


FROM  THE  YEAR  476  TO  590  99 

highest  ecclesiastical  dignity  of  the  city.  His 
exertions,  however,  met  with  no  greater  success 
than  in  the  previous  instance.  That  he  had  rivals, 
and  strenuous  and  unscrupulous  ones,  there  can 
be  no  doubt.  The  scandals  and  contentions  at- 
tendant upon  this  election  were  so  great  that 
they  were  extraordinary  even  for  this  age  of 
semi-barbarism.  The  church  of  Rodez  was 
stripped  of  most  of  its  sacred  vessels  and  all 
its  best  effects.'*®  What  use  was  made  of  these 
treasures  by  the  contending  parties  is  not  recorded ; 
that  at  least  part  of  them  became  a  means  of 
gaining  supporters  for  this  or  that  candidate  is, 
if  we  take  contemporary  conditions  into  account, 
by  no  means  unlikely.  Innocent,  count  of  Ge- 
vaudan,  secured  the  succession  with  the  help  of 
Queen  Brunehilde.'*'^ 

Confusion  reigned  in  the  see  of  Uzes  about  581 
owing  to  the  fact  that  Dinamius,  the  governor  of 
Provence,  tried  his  skill  in  episcopal  nominations 
without  royal  authorization.  To  this  official  Albi- 
nus  owed  the  episcopal  dignity,  which  he  held  only 
three  months.  At  his  death,  the  king  confirmed 
one  candidate,  Jovinus,  a  former  governor  of  the 
province,  while  Dinamius  confirmed  another,  Mar- 
cellus,  a  deacon  and  son  of  the  senator  Felix. 
That  a  confiict  ensued  between  the  two  rivals  need 

*^IUd.  VI,  37,  38.  "lUd. 


100  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

scarcely  be  mentioned;  Marcellus,  by  a  judicious 
use  of  presents,  triumphed  over  his  opponent  and 
remained  in  sole  possession  of  the  see.^^  Uzes 
belonged  at  the  time  to  the  kingdom  of  Childe- 
bert  II  (575-96)  ;  but  from  this  fact  it  does  not 
necessarily  follow  that  Childebert  received  the 
presents.  Intermediaries  may  have  been  the  reci- 
pients and,  in  return,  may  have  exercised  their 
influence  with  their  royal  master.  The  promise 
of  the  see  of  Toulouse,  which  Sagittarius,  bishop 
of  Gap  (560-85)  received  from  prince  Gundo- 
valdus  was  evidently  due  more  to  the  political 
support  of  this  unsuccessful  pretender's  cause  than 
to  the  discovery  in  the  criminal  Sagittarius  of 
episcopal  qualifications  which  he  did  not  possess.^^ 
As  for  King  Guntramof  Burgundy  (561-92),  he 
showed  no  inclination  to  yield  to  the  persuasive  in- 
fluence of  gifts,  on  the  occasion  of  the  nomination 
of  a  successor  to  Bishop  Remigius  or  Remedius  of 
Bourges  in  584.  To  the  many  applicants  present- 
ing themselves  before  him  with  gifts,  he  is  said  to 
have  answered :  "  It  is  not  our  custom  to  sell  the 
episcopal  dignity,  lest  our  name  be  dishonored  by 
such  a  shameful  transaction;  but  neither  should 
you  buy  it,  lest  you  be  compared  to  Simon  Magus. 
Sulpicius,  according  to  divine  foreknowledge,  will 

*^  Hist.  Franc,  vi,  7. 

"Greg,  of  Tours,  Hist.  Franc,  vii,  28. 


FROM  THE  YEAR  476  TO  590  101 

be  your  bishop."  ^^  Unfortunately,  the  irresolute 
ruler  did  not  always  live  up  to  his  sound  princi- 
ples. When  Gregory  of  Tours  speaks  of  the  king 
who  sold  the  bishopric  of  Eauze  to  a  certain 
Desiderius,  he  refers,  as  Hauck  has  proved,^^  to 
no  other  than  Guntram.  Eauze  was  the  capital 
of  the  province  of  ]!^ovempopulania  and  disap- 
peared as  an  episcopal  see  in  the  seventh  century. 
In  585  it  lost  its  bishop  by  the  death  of  Laban. 
Though  Guntram  was  opposed  to  simoniacal  ele- 
vations to  the  episcopate  and  had  even  taken  an 
oath  never  to  raise  a  layman  to  that  dignity,  yet 
he  yielded  to  bribery  and  violated  his  oath  by 
promoting  Desiderius  to  the  vacant  see.  To  find 
terms  sufficiently  expressive  of  his  indignation 
at  such  a  proceeding,  Gregory  falls  back  upon 
his  classical  reminiscences  and  exclaims  with 
Virgil :  ^^  '''  To  what  extremes  does  not  the  accursed 
thirst  for  gold  force  human  hearts  ?  "  ^^  It  would 
be  contrary  to  historical  truth,  however,  to  conclude 
from  this  royal  transgression  that  Guntram  was 
always  accessible  to  simoniacal  influence.  As 
Hauck  ^*  and  Vacandard  ^^  have  observed,  the 
appointment  of  Desiderius  to  the  see  of  Eauze  is 
the  only  case  in  which  guilt  of  simony  can  be 
proved  against  Guntram.     The  very  year  in  which 

'^Hist.  Franc.  \i,  39.  ^^  Bischofswahlen,  34,  n,  99. 

'^Aen.  Ill,  56  seq.  "'Hist.  Franc,  vrn,  22. 
"  Op.  cit.  34,  n.  100. 

^Rev.   quest,   hist.    (1898),  Lxiii,   353. 


102  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

this  event  occurred,  the  king  refused  the  presents 
of  the  deacon  Waldo,  who  sought  the  confirmation 
of  his  election  to  the  see  of  Bordeaux.^® 

The  facts  narrated  show  the  deplorable  con- 
ditions existing  in  the  church  of  Trance  during 
the  period.  The  kings  sold  bishoprics  or  ap- 
pointed their  favorites  to  them.^''^  Bribery 
was  resorted  to  not  only  to  obtain  their  sanc- 
tion of  elections,  but  also  to  gain  the  support 
of  the  courtiers  or  that  of  the  electors  of  the 
episcopal  city.  As  to  the  clergy  in  whom  we 
would  expect  a  better  understanding  of  spiritual 
things,  we  find,  at  first  sight,  that  they  were  more 
ready  to  buy  dignities  than  the  kings  were  to  sell 
them.  We  must  not  forget,  however,  the  great 
disproportion  between  the  number  of  clerics  and 
the  number  of  kings ;  and,  to  form  a  correct  judg- 
ment of  the  whole  situation,  we  must  remember 
the  divided  and  semi-barbarous  state  of  society. 
But  even  keeping  these  considerations  in  mind, 
we  cannot  but  have  an  unfavorable  idea  of  ecclesi- 
astical affairs  at  the  time.  When  Gregory  of 
Tours  speaks  of  the  usually  numerous  competitors 
for  an  episcopal  see;  when  he  refers  to  part  of  the 
period  as  a  time  when  bishoprics  were  sold  by 
kings  and  bought  by  clerics ;  when  Gallus  of  Cler- 
mont sarcastically  boasts  of  the  small  price  which 

^'Hist.  Franc,  viil,  22. 

"See  Loebell,  Qregor  v.  Tours,  344-45;  Hauck,  Bischofs- 
wahlen,   26-28,   34-35. 


FROM  THE  YEAR  476  TO  590  103 

the  episcopate  cost  him,  we  cannot  but  understand 
that  the  traffic  in  bishoprics  was  one  of  the  great 
evils  of  the  time.  The  one  bright  page  in  this 
history  from  an  ecclesiastical  point  of  view,  is 
the  opposition  displayed  by  the  zealous  bishops 
taken  from  the  celebrated  monastery  of  Lerins. 
They  were  the  soul  of  the  movement  against 
simony,  and  to  their  efforts  is  due,  to  some  extent, 
the  restrictive  and  condemnatory  legislation  of  the 
period.  First  and  foremost  among  them  ranked 
the  great  Casarius,  who  occupied  the  see  of  Aries 
for  forty  years  (502-542).  His  activity  extended 
far  beyond  his  diocese  and  his  lifetime,  and,  in 
a  large  measure,  affected  the  moral  life  of  the 
French  Church. 

III.     Simony  in  Other  Counteies. 

Although  simony  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
very  prevalent  in  I^orthwestern  Africa,  ecclesi- 
astical conditions  there  were  far  from  satisfactory. 
The  country  had  been  invaded  and  conquered  by 
the  Vandals  into  whose  hands  Carthage  fell  in 
439.  Like  most  of  the  German  Barbarians,  the 
conquerors  were  Arians.  Under  their  first  king 
in  Africa,  Genseric  (439-477)  they  indulged  in  a 
kind  of  persecution  of  Catholics  rather  unusual 
with  the  Teutonic  nations;  it  took  the  form  of 
confiscation  of  churches  and  church  property  and 
suppression    of    public    worship.     Genseric    im- 


104  A    HISTOEY    OF    SIMONY 

prisoned  or  banished  the  Catholic  bishops  of  his 
dominions  and  forbade  the  consecration  of  new 
ones.  That  under  such  circumstances  disorgani- 
zation reigned,  not  only  during  the  persecution, 
but  also  during  the  years  immediately  following, 
will  be  readily  understood.  A  year  before  his 
death,  Genseric  had  shown  himself  more  just  to 
his  Catholic  subjects,  allowing  them  to  bring  back 
their  bishops  and  clergy  from  exile  and  to  reopen 
their  churches.  His  son,  Hunneric,  who  succeeded 
him  and  reigned  for  seven  years  from  477-484, 
continued  for  a  time  the  same  lenient  policy.  But 
towards  the  end  of  his  reign  he  set  in  motion  a 
cruel  persecution  against  the  Catholic  Church.  Of 
his  banishment  of  bishops  and  worse  cruelties  we 
have  not  to  speak.  More  pertinent  is  the  fact 
recorded  by  Victor  Vitensis  ^^  that  he  contemplated 
a  general  law  for  his  dominions,  confiscating  the 
property  of  deceased  bishops,  and  enjoining  the 
payment  to  the  royal  treasury  of  500  solidi  by 
any  successor  before  he  could  be  consecrated.  The 
suggestion  by  persons  of  his  immediate  surround- 
ing that  the  enactment  of  such  a  law  would  lead 
to  reprisals  against  the  Arian  bishops  in  the  East- 
ern empire  made  the  king  desist  from  carrying 
out  his  plan. 

Victor  of  Tunnunum  is  authority  for  the  state- 
ment that  Firmus,  bishop  of  Tipasa  in  ISTumidia 

"^De  Pers.    Vand.   Lib.   II,  vii,   MOH.   Auct.   Antiq.   in, 
18,  ed.  Halm  (Berlin,  1878). 


FROM  THE   YEAR  476   TO   590  105 

(525-53),  assented  to  the  Three-Chapters  through 
corruption.  He  yielded  to  the  persuasiveness  of 
the  gifts  of  the  prince,  i,  e,,  the  emperor  Justi- 
nian.^® 

Unfortunate  as  was  the  condition  of  Catholics 
under  the  fierce  Vandals,  far  more  deplorable 
still  was  that  of  the  British  Church.  iJ^orth- 
western  Africa  groaned  principally  under  the 
oppression  of  its  rulers.  The  Britons  suffered 
from  woes  both  external  and  domestic.  To  the 
disasters  and  misery  which  followed  upon  the 
Saxon  invasion,  were  added  moral  degeneracy  and 
corruption  in  high  station  in  the  church  itself. 
"  The  long  and  unsuccessful  wars  which  they  had 
waged  against  their  fierce  invaders,  had  relaxed 
the  sinews  of  ecclesiastical  discipline ;  and  the  pro- 
fligate manners  of  their  clergy  were  become,  if  we 
may  credit  the  vehement  assertions  of  Gildas,  an 
insult  to  the  sanctity  of  their  profession."  ^^ 
Speaking  specifically  of  the  simony  of  the  clergy, 
this  ancient  unsparing  chronicler  writes: 

"  For  what  is  so  wicked  and  so  sinful  as  after  the 
example  of  Simon  Magus  (even  if  with  other  faults 
he  had  not  been  defiled  before),  for  any  man  with 
earthly  price  to  purchase  the  office  of  a  bishop  or 

°' Victor  Tunn.  Ad  ann.  552,  Auct.  Antiq.  xi,   202. 

""Lingard,  Antiquities  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  40-41 
(Philadelphia,  s.  d.).  On  the  testimony  of  Gildas  regarding 
the  state  of  the  British  Church,  see  Cabrol,  L'Angleterre 
Chr4t.  avant  les  Normands   (Paris,  1909),  48-52. 


106  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

priest,  which  with  holiness  and  righteous  life  alone 
ought  lawfully  to  be  obtained;  but  herein  they  do 
more  wilfully  and  desperately  err,  in  that  they  buy 
their  deceitful  and  unprofitable  ecclesiastical  degrees, 
not  of  the  apostles  or  their  successors,  but  of  tyranni- 
cal princes,  and  their  father  the  devil;  yea,  rather 
they  raise  this  as  a  certain  roof  and  covering  of  all 
offences,  over  the  frame  of  their  former  serious  life, 
that  being  protected  under  the  shadow  thereof,  no 
man  should  lightly  hereafter  lay  to  their  charge  their 
old  or  new  wickedness;  and  hereupon  they  build 
their  desires  of  covetousness  and  gluttony,  for  that 
being  now  the  rulers  of  many  they  may  more  freely 
make  havoc  at  their  pleasure.  For  if  truly  any  such 
offer  of  purchasing  ecclesiastical  promotions  were 
made  by  these  impudent  sinners  (I  will  not  say  with 
St.  Peter),  but  to  any  holy  priest  or  godly  king,  they 
would  no  doubt  receive  the  same  answer  which  their 
father  Simon  Magus  had  from  the  mouth  of  the 
apostle  Peter,  saying :  '  Thy  money  be  with  thee 
unto  thy  perdition.'  But,  alas !  perhaps  they  who 
order  and  advance  these  ambitious  aspirers,  yea,  they 
who  rather  throw  them  under  foot,  and  for  a  bless- 
ing give  them  a  cursing,  whilst  of  sinners  they  make 
them  not  penitents  (which  were  more  consonant  to 
reason)  but  sacrilegious  and  desperate  ofEenders,  and 
in  a  sort  install  Judas,  that  traitor  to  his  Master,  in 
the  chair  of  Peter,  and  Nicholas,  the  author  of  that 
foul  heresy,  in  the  seat  of  St.  Stephen  the  martyr, 
it  may  be,  at  first  obtained  their  own  priesthood  by 
the  same  means,  and  therefore  do  not  greatly  dislike 
in  their  children,  but  rather  respect  the  course,  that 


FROM  THE  YEAR  476  TO  590  107 

they  their  fathers  did  before  follow.  And  also,  if 
finding  resistance  in  obtaining  their  dioceses  at  home, 
and  some  who  severely  denounce  this  chaffering  of 
church-livings,  they  cannot  there  attain  to  such  a 
precious  pearl,  then  it  doth  not  so  much  loath  as 
delight  them  (after  they  have  carefully  sent  their 
messengers  beforehand)  to  cross  the  seas,  and  travel 
over  most  large  countries,  that  so,  in  the  end,  yea 
even  with  the  sale  of  their  whole  substance,  they  may 
win  and  compass  such  a  pomp,  and  such  an  incom- 
parable glory,  or  to  speak  more  truly,  such  a  dirty 
and  base  deceit  and  illusion.  And  afterwards  with 
great  show  and  magnificent  ostentation,  or  rather 
madness,  returning  back  to  their  own  native  soil, 
they  grow  from  stoutness  to  stateliness,  and  from 
being  used  to  level  their  looks  to  the  tops  of  the 
mountains,  they  now  lift  up  their  drowsy  eyes  into 
the  air,  even  to  the  highest  clouds,  and  as  Novatus, 
that  foul  hog,  and  persecutor  of  our  Lord's  precious 
Jewel,  did  once  at  Eome,  so  do  these  intrude  them- 
selves again  into  their  own  country,  as  creatures  of 
a  new  mould,  or  rather  as  instruments  of  the  devil, 
being  even  ready  in  this  state  and  fashion  to  stretch 
out  violently  their  hands  (not  so  worthy  of  the  holy 
altars  as  of  the  avenging  flames  of  hell)  upon  Christ's 
most  holy  sacrifices."  ^^ 

^  De  Excidio  Britanniae,  ed.  Mommsen  in  MGH.  Auct. 
Antiq.  xili,  Chronica  Minora,  Pt.  I,  62-64  (Berlin,  1894). 
We  have  reproduced  the  translation  of  J.  A.  Giles,  Six  Old 
English  Chronicles,  parag.  66,  67,  pp.  343-46  (London,  1848) 
in  Bohn's  Antiquarian  Library.  The  rendering  of  the  Latin 
"  seelestae  "  by  the  word  "  serious,"  which  we  have  italicized 
in  the  text  is  obviously  due  to  an  oversight  or  a  misprint. 


108  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

Only  a  citation  in  full  of  this  passage  could  give 
the  reader  a  correct  view,  as  far  as  this  is  possible 
under  the  circumstances,  of  British  ecclesiastical 
conditions,  as  Gildas  saw  them.  Corruption 
must  have  been  very  prevalent,  if  we  are  to  believe 
the  distressing  generalities  of  this  carping  chroni- 
cler, who  never  spends  much  time  in  the  enu- 
meration of  definite  facts  and  does  not  quote  so 
much  as  one  in  this  particular  instance. 

In  Spain  Isidore  of  Seville  and  John  of 
Biclaro  are  unanimous  in  relating  that  about  580, 
numerous  Catholics  abandoned  their  religious 
faith  and  adopted  Arianism.  They  add  that  bri- 
bery was  at  the  bottom  of  these  defections.®^ 
Apart  from  these  indications,  no  specific  case  of 
simony  can  be  cited  in  Spain.  It  is  evident,  how- 
ever, from  the  Spanish  legislative  enactments  of 
the  period  that  the  traffic  in  sacred  things  was  not 
by  any  means  unknown.  In  the  appointment  to 
bishoprics  it  may  have  prevailed  to  a  less  extent 
than  in  the  Merovingian  kingdoms ;  but  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  sacraments  it  was  probably 
more  prevalent.  In  no  ecclesiastical  law  framed 
among  the  Franks  do  we  find  such  insistence  on 
the  free  administration  of  baptism  as  appears  in 
Spanish  legislation. 

'^'Isid.  Hist.  Goth.  c.  50,  MGH.  Auct.  Antiq.  xi,  288,  ed. 
Mommsen;  Johan.  Biclar.  Chronic.  Ad  ann.  580,  ibid.  216; 
see  Gams,  Kirchengesch.  von  Span.  II,  i,  490. 


CHAPTER  V 

OPPOSITION    TO    SIMONY    IN    THE    WEST 
FROM   476   TO   590 

I.  Opposition  at  Rome  and  throughout  Italy: — Latin 
translation  of  the  second  canon  of  Chalcedon  —  The 
Roman  synod  of  502  —  The  "  Canonical  Letter "  and 
the  "  Liber  Ecclesiasticorum  Dogmatum  "  — Letter  of 
Pope  Gelasius  I  —  Enactments  of  the  Roman  synod  of 
the  year  499  —  Letter  of  Pope  Symmachus  to  Csesarius 
of  Aries  —  Pope  Pelagius  I  and  simony  —  Anti-simoni- 
acal  edict  of  King  Athalaric  —  II.  Opposition  to 
simony  in  France  and  Spain: — Canons  of  the  council 
of  Origans  (533)  —  Council  of  Clermont  (535)— The 
fifth  synod  of  Orleans  —  The  second  council  of  Tours  — 
Letter  of  Pope  Hormisdas  to  the  Spanish  Church  — 
The   third   synod  of   Braga. 

I.     Opposition  to   Simony  at  Rome  and 

THKOUGHOUT    ItALY 

The  second  canon  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon, 
which  has  been  discussed  and  which  contains  such 
a  strong  condemnation  of  simony,  was  perhaps 
almost  immediately  made  accessible  to  the  West 
in  a  Latin  translation.  Certain  it  is  that  in 
March,  453,^  Pope  Leo  I  requested  Bishop  Julian 
of  Cos,  who  had  been  one  of  the  Roman  repre- 

^Jaff6,  489. 

109 


110  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

sentatives  at  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  to  make 
a  translation  of  its  Acts. 

Quesnel  considers  this  a  sufficient  reason  to  at- 
tribute to  Julian  the  Prisca  or  Antiqua,  the  oldest 
Latin  version,  which  we  have  of  the  synod,^  an 
attribution  which  is  rejected  by  Baluze.^  As  we 
have  no  positive  proof  that  Julian  complied  with 
the  request  of  his  friend,  he  can,  at  the  very  best, 
be  looked  upon  only  as  a  probable  author  of  the 
translation.  The  first  certain  trace  of  the  exist- 
ence of  the  Acts  in  Latin  is  found  in  the  writings 
of  Facundus  of  Hermiane.  In  his  "  Defense  of 
the  Three-Chapters,"  a  work  which  he  composed 
about  546,  Facundus  used  the  version  known  as 
the  Prisca^  The  Roman  ecclesiastic  Rusticus 
undertook  a  revision  of  the  same  translation  in 
549  or  550.^  It  had,  therefore,  a  wide  circulation 
in  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century. 

The  funds  and  property  of  the  Church  were 
frequently  used  by  papal  and  episcopal  candidates 
after  their  election,  to  redeem  the  promises 
of  temporal  reward  which  they  had  previously 
made  to  further  their  appointment.  Some  atten- 
tion, therefore,  ought  to  be  given  here  to  the  pro- 

^  See  Maassen,  Gesch.  der  Quell,  des  Kan.  Rechts.  139-46. 
'  See  Mansi,  vii,  654  seqq. 
*Lib.  Ill,  c.  5,  PL.  67,  598  seqq. 

"  See  the  Latin  version  of  the  canon  in  PL.  56,  537,  and  in 
Maassen,  op.  cit.  945. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  HI 

hibitions  regarding  the  alienation  or  disposition 
of  ecclesiastical  property,  since  they  were,  to  a 
large  extent,  anti-simoniacal  measures. 

From  the  documents  of  the  Roman  synod  of 
502,  it  is  clearly  apparent  that  King  Odoacer 
framed  a  law  (483),  which  prohibited  papal  ali- 
enation of  ecclesiastical  property  or  ornaments, 
declared  any  future  alienation  of  this  sort  invalid, 
and  pronounced  anathema  against  the  parties  to 
any  such  transaction.  The  bishops  of  this  synod, 
at  which  the  decree  was  read  by  the  deacon  Hor- 
misdas,  vigorously  protested  against  the  usurpa- 
tion of  such  power  by  a  layman,  with  regard  both 
to  the  legislation  on  ecclesiastical  property  and  the 
imposition  of  anathema.  Pope  Symmachus  (498- 
514),  the  president  of  the  synod,  disapproved  the 
action  of  Odoacer,  but  looked  with  favor  upon 
the  measure  itself.  The  synod  approved  his  pro- 
posal to  have  the  prohibition  maintained  in  a 
different  form  for  the  Roman  church  alone,  and 
extended  its  application  to  the  priests  and  other 
members  of  that  church.  Even  the  usufruct  of 
landed  estates  was  to  be  transferred  to  none  but 
clerics,  captives  or  strangers.  An  exception  to 
these  rules  was  made  for  city  houses,  which  neces- 
sitated considerable  expense  for  their  maintenance, 
also  for  gold,  silver  and  some  other  movable  goods. 
Loss  of  dignity  was  decreed  against  persons  ali- 
enating the  property  and   anathema  pronounced 


112  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

against  those  acquiring  it,  or  signing,  as  witnesses, 
the  contract  of  such  a  transfer.  Moreover,  ecclesi- 
astics were  empowered  to  demand  the  restitution 
of  the  alienated  property  with  its  products.^ 

A  fifth  century  document,  which  goes  under  the 
name  of  "  Canonical  Letter  "  "^  and  appears  only 
in  Italian  collections,  forbids  priests,  deacons  or 
other  clerics  to  sell  ecclesiastical  estates  or  to 
donate  them  to  relatives.  Violation  of  this  pro- 
vision entails  restitution  of  the  property  or  ejection 
of  the  offender.  Married  clergymen  are  enjoined 
not  to  appropriate  sacred  vestments  for  the  use 
of  their  wives  and  daughters,^  as  they  had  been 
accused  of  doing. 

To  the  second  half  of  the  fifth  century  belongs 
the  "  Liber  Ecclesiasticorum  Dogmatum,"  at- 
tributed to  Gennadius  of  Marseilles.  It  is  a 
summary  of  Catholic  doctrine  and  prescriptions. 
Among  those  to  be  debarred  from  ordination  it 
mentions  the  one  who  is  led  by  ambition  to  offer 
money  for  it  in  imitation  of  the  example  of  Simon 
Magus.  ^ 

'Thiel,  Epp.  i,   686-92;   Hefele,  ii,  643-45. 

TL.  56,  892. 

^PL.  56,   893. 

'  De  Ecclesiasticis  Dogmatibus,  c.  72  in  PL.  58,  997; 
C.  H.  Turner.  The  Liber  Ecclesiasticorum  Dogmatum 
attributed  to  Gennadius  in  Jour.  Theol.  Studies  (1905), 
VII,  78-99.  In  Turner's  text  the  pertinent  passage  is  found 
on  p.  96,  c.  XXXVIII. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  113 

In  the  year  494  Pope  Gelasiiis  addressed  an 
important  letter  relative  to  simony  to  all  the 
bishops  of  Liicania,  Brutium  and  Sicily,  which 
was  probably  also  sent  to  other  churches  according 
to  the  general  custom.  ^°  It  stipulates  that  no 
compensation  be  asked  from  the  faithful  for  the 
administration  of  baptism  and  confirmation, 
because  such  a  request  might  deter  some  from 
receiving  the  sacraments,  either  on  account  of 
poverty  or  out  of  indignation.  The  violation  of 
this  prohibition  carried  with  it  the  loss  of  the 
offender's  position.  ^^  Every  purchaser  of  a  sacred 
dignity  was  likewise  to  be  deposed,  it  being  meet 
that  such  an  impious  transaction  should  not  go 
unpunished.  The  condemnation  of  Simon  related 
in  Holy  Writ,  applies  to  both  the  purchaser  and 
the  seller.  ^- 

Owing  to  the  division  and  strife  attending  the 
electionof  Pope  Symmachus,  498,  the  latter,  imme- 
diately after  his  accession,  summoned  a  council 
which  was  held  at  Rome  in  499.  The  holding  of 
the  synod,  in  spite  of  the  winter  season,  was  due, 
as  the  pope  himself  explained  to  the  assembled 
members,  to  the  necessity  of  laying  down  a  firm 
rule  for  the  creation  of  the  Roman  bishops,  so  that 
the  contention  and  popular  tumults  which  took 

"Thiel,  Epp.  31,  no.  5. 
"f/pp.  14,  c.  5,  Thiel,  364. 
"/6td.  c.  24,  Thiel,  375. 

8 


114  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

place  at  his  own  election,  might  not  be  repeated. 
The  papal  notary,  Emilian,  then  read  to  the 
council  the  statutes,  which  we  here  substantially 
reproduce : 

1.  Owing  to  the  disturbances  that  have  occurred 
in  the  past  and  to  prevent  a  recurrence  thereof 
in  the  future,  the  holy  synod  decrees,  that  should 
any  priest,  deacon  or  cleric  during  the  lifetime 
of  the  pope  and  without  his  foreknowledge,  give 
for  the  future  election  a  signature,  promise  a 
voting  ticket,  pledge  himself  under  oath,  promise 
a  vote,  or  should  any  one  of  these  same  clerics 
attend  private  meetings  for  deliberating  and  taking 
decisions  on  this  matter,  he  shall  be  deprived  of 
his  dignity  and  of  communion. — The  synod  ac- 
claimed this  decision. 

2.  The  same  penalties  shall  be  incurred  by 
every  one  who  shall  be  convicted  of  having  sought 
the  succession  during  the  pope's  lifetime,  or  of 
having  made  any  attempts  to  secure  it.  When  the 
pope  asked  whether  the  statute  met  with  the 
approval  of  the  whole  synod,  all  the  members 
answered  in  the  affirmative. 

3.  Should  the  death  of  the  pope  occur  so  un- 
expectedly (which  may  God  avert)  as  to  prevent 
him  from  taking  any  measures  for  the  election 
of  a  successor,  the  candidate  unanimously  elected 
by  the  clergy  shall  be  consecrated;  but  if,  as  is 
usual,  there  be  division  and  contention,  the  opinion 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  II5 

of  the  majority  shall  triumph.  The  elector  who, 
boimd  by  promise,  casts  his  vote  with  bias  ^^  shall 
be  deprived  of  his  ecclesiastical  office.  (Renewed 
approval  by  the  synod.) 

4.  If  anyone  bring  to  the  notice  of  the  eccle- 
siastical authority  the  designs  of  those  who  violate 
these  enactments  and  prove  the  guilt  of  the  parti- 
cipants, he  shall,  if  himself  implicated,  not  only 
go  unpunished,  but  be  duly  rewarded.  The  synod 
manifested  by  acclamation  its  approval  of  these 
decisions.^* 

The  mention  of  measures  taken  by  the  pope  re- 
garding the  succession,  which  occurs  in  this  synod, 
can  evidently  not  mean  that  he  appointed  his 
successor ;  he  merely  suggested  the  name  of  a  per- 
son whom  he  thought  fit  for  the  papacy. ^^ 

In  the  month  of  October,  513,  Csesarius,  bishop 
of  Aries,  ^^  addressed  a  petition  to  Pope  Sym- 
machus  (498-514),  in  which  he  requested  him  to 
put  a  stop  to  ambitious  intrigues  for  the  acquisition 
of  the  episcopal  dignity.  Acting  on  Caesarius's 
letter,  the  pope  directed  (Kovember  6,  513)  that 
ambition  should  not  give  access  to  the  episcopate; 
for,  although  the  inordinate  acts  which  spring  from 

"  "  Non  recto   judicio." 

^*MGH.  Auct.  Ant.  xii,  402-5.  Thiel,  Epist,  1,  645  seqq.; 
Hefele,  Concilieng.  11,  626-7. 

^°  See  Mausi,  viii,  238,  note  g;  and  Baronius,  Ad  ann. 
499,  n.  8. 

^«  Thiel,   Epp.   i,   727-28;    MOH.  Epp.  m,   40. 


116  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

it  are  committed  in  the  lay  state,  subsequent  oppro- 
brium falls  to  a  certain  extent  on  persons  who 
are  religious  and  serve  God.  Hence  the  episcopal 
candidate  should  not  secure  through  money  the 
intervention  of  influential  parties  in  his  behalf, 
nor  should  he  obtain  the  suffrage  of  the  clergy  or 
of  citizens  by  intimidating  them  or  offering  them 
rewards.  No  authoritative  report  regarding  the 
result  of  an  election  shall  be  written  in  the  absence 
of  the  official  representative  of  the  ecclesiastical 
authority  ("  visitor ")  who  may  testify  to  the 
unanimity  of  clergy  and  citizens.  These  instruc- 
tions, the  pope  adds,  are  for  all  bishops;  and  by 
this  expression  he  intended  to  include  not  only 
all  the  suffragan  bishops  of  Csesarius,  but  the  uni- 
versal episcopate.  ^'^ 

It  was  probably  with  a  view  to  obtaining 
the  papacy  from  the  emperor  Justinian  that 
Pelagius  I  (556-61)  promptly  condemned  the 
Three  Chapters,  which  he  had  till  then  vigor- 
ously defended.  This  change  combined  with 
other  reasons  aroused  such  opposition  to  him  in 
Italy  that  he  could  not  find  the  three  bishops  re- 
quired by  the  canons  for  the  consecration.  The 
ceremony  was  performed  by  only  two, — those  of 
Perugia  and  Ferentino, — while  the  ordinary  con- 
secrator,  the  bishop  of  Ostia,  was  represented  by 

"Thiel,  op.   cit.   726;    MGH.  Vol.   cit.  37-39. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  117 

the  priest  Andrew.  Pelagius  skillfully  overcame 
the  resistance  to  his  nomination.  A  public  pro- 
cession was  organized  in  which  the  commander  of 
the  imperial  troops,  ISTarses,  with  his  general  staff 
and  the  civil  authorities,  marched  in  great  pomp 
by  the  pope's  side  from  the  church  of  St.  Pancra- 
tius  to  the  basilica  of  St.  Peter.  Here  Pelagius 
ascended  the  ambo  in  the  presence  of  a  great  con- 
course of  people,  and  pronounced  a  solemn  justifi- 
cation of  his  conduct  while  the  Cross  and  the 
Book  of  the  Gospels  were  held  above  his  head. 
He  then  asked  the  audience  to  confirm  the  follow- 
ing enactment :  "  No  ecclesiastical  promotion 
from  the  ofiice  of  door-keeper  to  that  of  bishop 
shall  be  due  either  to  gold  or  (pecuniary) 
promises;  for  you  all  know  that  this  is  simony. 
But  the  candidate  ought  to  be  learned  in  the  ways 
of  God,  of  good  character,  and  ought  to  attain 
the  highest  office  not  through  his  gifts,  but  his 
good  life."  ^^  This  prohibition,  concurred  in  by 
the  people,  had  only  a  local  character,  as  is  evident 
from  the  attendant  circumstances ;  it  applied  only 
to  Rome.  To  the  honor  of  Pelagius  it  must  be  said 
that,  in  spite  of  his  act  of  inconsistency  which 
probably  raised  him  to  the  pontifical  throne,  he 
faithfully  observed  his  own  prohibition  of  simony. 
We  read  in  his  epitaph  that  he  performed  many 

"Lib.  Pont.  I,  303;   see  PL.  69,  399;   Duchesne  in  Rev. 
quest,   hist.    (1884),  xxxvi,  424-40. 


118  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

ordinations  of  sacred  ministers  (bishops,  priests 
and  deacons),  but  never  derived  any  benefit  from 
them.^®  The  special  mention  of  this  practice  of 
his  implies  that  it  was  somewhat  unusual  not  to 
accept  payment  for  ordinations. 

To  these  ecclesiastical  regulations  must  be  added 
the  senatus-consultum  of  the  year  530  and  the 
important  edict  of  King  Athalaric  issued  in  533 
in  the  form  of  a  letter  to  Pope  John  II  (533-35). 
The  senatus-consultum  was  a  repetition  of  the  syn- 
odal decree  of  the  year  499.  It  severely  prohib- 
ited negotiations  regarding  the  papal  succession 
during  the  lifetime  of  a  pope,  as  well  as  the  giving 
and  receiving  of  bribes  in  connection  with  the  same 
matter.^^  As  to  King  Athalaric's  edict,  the  follow- 
ing abstract  of  it  is  given  by  T.  Hodgkin,^^  an 
eminent  authority  on  this  period  of  Italian  history : 

"  The  Defensor  of  the  Eoman  Church  hath  in- 
formed us  in  his  tearful  petition  that  lately,  when 
a  President  was  sought  for  the  papal  chair,  so  much 
were  the  usual  largesses  to  the  poor  augmented  by 

^  Lib.  Pont.  I,  304;  Duchesne,  Rev.  quest,  hist.  I.  c.  440. 

"  Sacravit  multos   divina   lege  ministros 
Nil  pretio  faciens  immaculata  manus." 

""Lib.  Pont.  I,  282,  n.  4. 

'^Letters  of  Cassiodorus,  398-99.  The  original  text  of 
the  document  is  found  in  Cassiod.  Variae,  rx,  15,  MOH. 
Auct.  Antiq.  xii,  279-81,  See  also  Baronius,  Ad  ann.  533, 
nos.  32-41. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  119 

the  promises  which  had  been  extorted  from  the  can- 
didate, that;,  shameful  to  say,  even  the  sacred  vessels 
were  exposed  to  sale  in  order  to  provide  the  necessary 
money. 

"  Therefore  let  your  Holiness  know  that  by  this 
present  decree,  which  relates  also  to  all  the  Patri- 
archs and  Metropolitan  Churches  [the  five  Metro- 
politan Churches  in  Eome,  and  such  sees  as  Milan, 
Aquileia,  Eavenna],  we  confirm  the  wise  law  passed 
by  the  Senate  in  the  time  of  the  most  holy  Pope 
Boniface  [predecessor  of  John  II].  By  it  any  con- 
tract or  promise  made  by  any  person  in  order  to 
obtain  a  bishopric  is  declared  void. 

"  Anyone  refusing  to  refund  money  so  received  is 
to  be  declared  guilty  of  sacrilege,  and  restitution 
is  to  be  enforced  by  the  judge. 

"  Should  a  contention  arise  as  to  an  election  to 
the  Apostolic  See,  and  the  matter  be  brought  to  our 
palace  for  decision,  we  direct  that  the  maximum  fee 
to  be  paid,  on  the  completion  of  the  necessary  docu- 
ments ( ?),  shall  be  3,000  solidi  (£1,800)  ;  but  this  is 
only  to  be  exacted  from  persons  of  sufficient  ability 
to  pay  it. 

"  Patriarchs  [Archbishops  of  the  other  great 
Italian  Sees]  under  similar  circumstances  are  to  pay 
not  more  than  2,000  solidi  (£1,200). 

"  No  one  is  to  give  (on  his  consecration)  more 
than  500  solidi  (£300)  to  the  poor. 

"  Anyone  professing  to  obtain  for  money  the 
suffrage  of  any  one  of  our  servants  on  behalf  of  a 
candidate  for  Papacy  or  Patriarchate,  shaU  be  forced 
to   refund  the  money.     If   it  cannot   be   recovered 


120  A  HISTORY  OP  SIMONY 

from  him,  it  may  be  from  his  heirs.     He  himself 
shall  be  branded  with  infamy. 

"  Should  the  giver  of  the  money  have  been  bound 
by  such  oaths,  that,  without  imperilling  his  soul,  he 
cannot  disclose  the  transaction,  anyone  else  may  in- 
form, and  on  establishing  the  truth  of  his  accusation, 
receive  a  third  part  of  the  money  so  corruptly  paid, 
the  rest  to  go  to  the  churches  themselves,  for  the 
repair  of  the  fabric  or  for  the  daily  ministry.  Ee- 
member  the  fate  of  Simon  Magus.  We  have  ordered 
that  this  decree  be  made  known  to  the  Senate  and 
people  by  the  Praefect  of  the  City." 

The  king's  letter  to  the  prefect  of  Rome,  Sal- 
ventius,  "  rehearses  the  motives  of  the  previous 
edict,  and  directs  that  both  it  and  the  Senatus  Con- 
sulta  having  reference  to  the  same  subject  [and 
framed  tvs^o  years  previously],  be  engraved  on 
marble  tablets,  and  fixed  up  in  a  conspicuous 
place,  before  the  Atrium  of  St.  Peter  the 
Apostle."  22 

The  promises  of  money  to  the  poor  made  by 
the  papal  and  episcopal  candidates,  although  appar- 
ently harmless  in  themselves,  led  to  serious  abuses. 
As  the  people  took  part  in  the  election  to  eccles- 
iastical oflSces,  these  promises  of  more  or  less  con- 
siderable distributions  of  money  became  a  means 
of  gaining  supporters  and  a  cause  of  impoverish- 

'"Hodgkin,  op.  cit.  400;  Cassiod.  Yariae,  ix,  16. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  121 

ment  of  churclies.  Rules  governing  such  distri- 
butions had,  therefore,  to  be  issued,  as  was  done 
in  the  above-quoted  edict.  The  same  royal  docu- 
ment also  stipulated  the  maximum  amount  that 
could  be  received  by  civil  officials  for  their  deci- 
sion of  contested  elections.  This  was  evidently 
not  an  attempt  to  suppress  all  pecuniary  compen- 
sation, but  rather  a  sanction  of  a  definite  sum. 
Speaking  of  this  regulation,  Hartmann  writes: 
"  It  was  the  course  which  was  then  time  and  again 
followed  in  public  life.  Deep-rooted  abuses  were 
not  abolished,  but,  as  far  as  possible,  regularized 
and  reduced  to  a  system."  ^^ 

11.    Opposition  to  Simony  in  France  and 
Spain 

The  prohibitions  issued  by  Pope  Symmachus  at 
the  request  of  Caesar ius  of  Aries  have  already  been 
recorded.  The  example  set  by  the  pope  was  fol- 
lowed by  the  councils  of  the  period.  One  of  these 
assembled  at  Orleans  in  533.  It  had  been  con- 
voked, as  we  are  told  in  the  short  preface  to  its 
canons,  by  the  Merovingian  kings  to  treat  of  the 
observance  of  Catholic  legislation.  It  was  the 
second  to  be  held  at  Orleans;  the  kings,  at  whose 
bidding  it  met,  were  the  three  sons  of   Clovis: 

"  Geschichte  Italiens,  i,  239. 


122  A  HISTORY  OF   SIMONY 

Childebert  I,  king  of  Paris  (511-58),  Theodoric, 
king  of  Austrasia  (511-34)  and  Clothaire,  king 
of  Soissons  (511-61).  The  city  of  Orleans  formed 
part  of  Childebert's  dominions,  but  numerous  bish- 
ops from  the  other  two  kingdoms  attended  the 
synod,  which  may  thus  be  regarded  as  a  national 
council.  The  canons  relating  to  our  subject  are 
the  third,  fourth  and  fifth.  The  third  runs  as 
follows :  "  No  bishop  shall  for  any  reason  whatever 
accept  anything  for  the  ordination  of  bishops  or 
other  clerics ;  for  it  is  sinful  for  a  bishop  to  yield, 
through  cupidity,  to  corruption." 

The  fourth  canon  reads :  "  Should  any  one,  by 
his  execrable  ambition,  have  sought  to  procure 
the  episcopacy  through  money,  he  shall  be  dis- 
carded as  unworthy  (reprobus)  ;  for,  according  to 
Apostolic  pronouncement,  God's  gifts  are  not  to 
be  exchanged  for  money."  To  this  the  fifth  canon 
adds  that  "a  bishop,  who  goes  to  bury  a  colleague, 
is  not  to  demand,  apart  from  the  necessary  ex- 
penses,  any  remuneration  for  his  services."  ^^ 

A  little  more  than  two  years  later,  on  November 
8,  535,  a  synod  was  held  at  Clermont  with  the 
approbation  of  King  Theodebert  I,  of  Austrasia 
(534-48).  Its  president  was  Bishop  Honoratus 
of  Bourges,  who  had  already  presided  at  the  second 
council  of  Orleans  just  referred  to.     The  synod 

="Maassen,  Concilia,  I,  62;   Mansi,  vin,  836;  Hefele,  n, 
755  seqq. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  123 

entered  into  some  details  regarding  promotion  to 
the  episcopate: 

"  No  one  shall  seek  the  sacred  honor  of  the  episco- 
pate through  promises,  but  through  merit,  nor  owe 
this  divine  office  to  his  possessions  but  to  his  sound 
morals.  Nor  shall  any  one  be  raised  to  the  apex  of 
the  most  eminent  dignity  through  the  favor  of  a  few, 
but  by  the  election  of  all.  Extraordinary  care  shall 
be  exercised  in  the  selection  of  bishops;  for,  irre- 
proachable should  be  the  conduct  of  him  who  is 
placed  over  men  needful  of  correction.  Let  each 
person  carefully  consider  the  price  of  the  Lord's 
flock,  so  as  to  realize  that  its  pastors  should  be 
created  through  merit.  The  candidate  to  the  epis- 
copate shall,  therefore,  obtain  the  dignity  by  the 
election  of  clerics  and  citizens,  with  the  consent  of 
the  metropolitan  of  the  province;  he  shall  not  have 
recourse  to  the  protection  of  the  powerful,  nor  by 
secret  machinations  win  over  some  by  reward  and 
compel  others  through  fear,  to  secure  a  decision  in 
his  own  favor.  Should  any  one  be  guilty  in  this 
respect,  he  shall  be  deprived  of  the  communion  of 
the  Church,  in  which  he  wished  to  become  an  un- 
worthy ruler."  ^° 

On  October  28,  549,  seven  archbishops,  forty- 
three  bishops  and  twentj-one  episcopal  represen- 

'"Maassen,  Concilia,  can.  2,  66-67;  Mansi,  vni,  860; 
Hefele,  ll,  761  seqq. 


124  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

tatives  signed  the  decrees  of  the  fifth  synod  of 
Orleans  which  had  been  convoked  by  King  Childe- 
bert  I,  of  Paris.  The  subject  of  episcopal  elections 
had  again  been  considered  and  the  following 
enactment  was  promulgated :  "  IsTo  one  shall  obtain 
the  episcopate  through  reward  or  purchase;  but, 
with  the  consent  of  the  king  and  after  the  elec- 
tion by  the  clergy  and  people,  the  candidate  is, 
according  to  the  ancient  canons,  to  be  consecrated 
by  the  metropolitan  or  his  substitute  in  con- 
junction with  the  provincial  bishops.  Should  any 
one  violate  this  decree  and  purchase  the  dignity, 
he  shall  be  deposed."  ^®  This  canon  is  remarkable 
for  the  clear  and  practical  way  in  which  it  sought 
to  settle  the  vexed  question  of  the  nomination  of 
bishops.  The  attempt  to  banish  simony  from  such 
nominations  was  nothing  new ;  nor  is  the  evil  more 
forcibly  condemned  here  than  in  previous  legis- 
lation. The  point  of  special  interest  is  the  con- 
cession made  to  the  civil  authority  in  the  selection 
of  bishops.  Things  had  come  to  such  a  pass  that 
it  was  impossible  to  exclude  the  royal  power  from 
all  influence  over  ecclesiastical  affairs;  on  the 
other  hand  the  king's  custom  of  appointing  bishops 
just  like  state  officials  could  not  be  tolerated.  The 
synod  chose  a  prudent  middle  course;  it  granted 
the  civil  ruler  the  right  of  confirming  or  rejecting 

"Maassen,   Concilia,  can.    10,   103-104;   Mansi,  ix,   131; 
Hefele,  iii,  1  seqq. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  125 

the  person  chosen  by  clergy  and  people.  The  solu- 
tion was  the  best  obtainable  at  the  time,  and  it 
afforded  the  bishops  an  opportunity  of  insisting 
on  the  necessity  of  popular  election  and  of  thus 
indirectly  disapproving  the  royal  tendency  of 
appointing  the  bishops  without  the  people.  Ac- 
cording to  Mansi  ^^  and  Hefele,^^  this  canon  was 
renewed  by  the  second  council  of  Clermont,  which, 
they  think,  met  in  the  same  year,  shortly  after 
that  of  Orleans.  But  Maassen  ^®  has  denied,  with 
good  reason,  it  would  seem,  the  existence  of  this 
second  council  of  Clermont;  for  1.  The  decisions 
of  the  two  synods  are  identical,  and  2.  The  titles 
of  their  Acts  in  which  mention  is  made  of  this 
alleged  council  of  Clermont,  tell  us  at  the  same 
time  that  the  council  was  convoked  by  King  Childe- 
bert  in  the  city  of  Orleans.  The  name  council 
of  Clermont  is  consequently  false  and  probably 
attributable  to  the  error  of  some  copyist. 

The  second  council  of  Tours,  held  in  567, 
logically  decreed  punishment  not  only  against  the 
giver,  but  also  against  the  recipient  of  money  for 
spiritual  things.  Its  twenty-eighth  canon  (accord- 
ing to  another  numbering,  the  twenty-seventh)  runs 
as  follows :  "  ISTo  bishop  shall  demand  remunera- 
tion for  the  ordination  of  clerics:  for  such  action 


'  IX,  642  seqq.  »  Cg.  m,  5-6. 

'  Concilia,  100. 


126  A  HISTORY  OF   SIMONY 

is  not  only  sacrilegious,  but  heretical.  As  it  is 
stated  in  the  book  '  De  Dogmatibus  Ecclesiasticis,' 
that  cleric  is  not  to  be  ordained,  who  following 
the  example  of  Simon  Magus,  offers  through 
ambition  money  to  a  bishop.  It  is  said  more- 
over :  '  Freely  have  you  received,  freely  give.'  ^^ 
And  as  he  who  harbors  the  thought  of  buying 
the  gift  of  God  and  he  who  sells  it  are  both  alike, 
both  will  be  excluded  from  the  Church  until  the 
next  synod.  For  the  exclusion  from  office  of  the 
one  liable  to  transgress  is  a  prudent  measure  of 
safety  to  prevent  evil."  ^^ 

We  have  referred  above  to  the  earnestness  of 
the  Spanish  bishops  in  proscribing  the  least  sem- 
blance of  simony  from  their  church.  Though  a 
credit  to  their  zeal,  the  radical  measures  adopted 
do  not  seem  to  have  been  effective.  At  the  begin- 
ning of  the  sixth  century.  Bishop  John  of  Tarra- 
gona,^^ addressed  a  petition  to  Pope  Hormisdas 
(514-23)  in  which  he  requested  him  to  issue  re- 
formatory decrees  for  all  the  churches  of  Spain. 
The  petition  itself  has  not  come  down  to  our  times ; 
but  from  the  pope's  answer  we  may  gather  with 
certainty  that  abuses  of  a  simoniacal  nature  had 
crept  into  the  church  of  Spain.  The  papal  letter, 
which  was  written  April  2,  517,  reveals,  moreover, 

»''  Matth.  X,  8. 

"Maassen,  op.  cit.  135;  Mansi,  ix,  805;  Hefele,  in,  27. 

°^  See  Gams,  Kg.  von  Spam.  II,  l,  436. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  127 

the  fact  that  Spain  was  suffering  from  the  other 
evil  which  afflicted  the  Frankish  church,  viz.,  the 
elevation  of  laymen  to  the  episcopate.  With  re- 
gard to  simony,  in  particular,  the  pope  censures 
the  purchase  of  episcopal  consecration.  The 
reasons  which  he  puts  forward  against  such  action 
are:  1.  The  punishment  which  the  apostles  in- 
flicted upon  Simon  the  Magician,  who  sought  to 
buy  the  Holy  Ghost;  2.  The  little  reverence 
which  we  entertain  for  anything  we  can  procure 
by  purchase.  In  episcopal  elections,  which  should 
be  faithfully  adhered  to,  he  sees  a  means  of  pre- 
serving the  honor  of  the  episcopate.  In  an  affair 
of  such  importance,  popular  judgment  may  be 
looked  upon  as  the  judgment  of  God;  for  where 
there  is  simple  and  unsophisticated  agreement, 
there  God  is.  The  case  in  which  a  person  is  free 
from  simony  himself,  but  connives  either  volun- 
tarily or  through  necessity  at  the  receiving  of 
some  pecuniary  remuneration  by  another,  also 
claims  the  attention  and  solicitude  of  the  Supreme 
Pontiff.  A  person  who  has  acted  in  such  a  manner 
should  not  consider  himself  without  guilt,  for  his 
cooperation  is  sinful.  The  violation  of  the  com- 
mandments consists  not  only  in  committing  per- 
sonal sin,  but  also  in  consenting  to  the  sin  of 
another.  The  following  means  are  recommended 
as  remedies  in  the  case:  adhesion  to  the  privileges 
attributed  by  the  ancient  Fathers  to  the  metro- 


128  A  HISTORY  OF   SIMONY 

politans  on  the  one  hand,  and  conscientious 
observance  of  his  own  duties  by  the  metropolitan 
on  the  other.  The  exclusion  of  venality  from  the 
temple,  the  pope  concludes,  will  bring  with  it  the 
disappearance  of  discord,  and  charity  will  reign 
supreme.^^ 

Inferior  in  authority,  though  hardly  less  im- 
portant in  this  matter,  were  the  decisions  of  the 
third  (properly  speaking  the  second)  synod  of 
Braga.  At  this,  the  first  and  only  national 
council  of  the  Sueves,  held  in  572,^^  simony 
formed  one  of  the  principal  subjects  of  discussion. 
The  second  canon,  which  forbids  bishops  on  their 
pastoral  visitation  to  exact  more  than  two  solidi 
from  the  several  churches,  does  not  necessarily 
relate  to  simony.     The  third  canon  is  very  explicit : 

"Bishops  shall  not  receive  any  presents  for  the 
ordination  of  clerics,  but,  as  it  is  written,  what  they 
have  received  gratuitously  from  God,  they  shall  give 
gratuitously.  The  grace  of  God  and  the  imposition 
of  hands  shall  not  be  sold  at  any  price;  for  the 
ancient  decrees  of  the  Fathers  have  stated  this  re- 
specting ecclesiastical  ordinations,  saying:  Anathema 
to  the  giver  and  to  the  recipient.  Hence,  as  some 
guilty  of  numerous  crimes  and  ministering  un- 
worthily at  the  sacred  altar,  obtain  this  office  not 
through  the  testimonials  of  a  good  conduct,  but  by 

8'Thiel,  I,  788-93. 

"Stutz,    Beneficialwesen,    i,    96. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  129 

a  profusion  of  presents,  it  must  be  recalled  that 
clerical  ordination  should  be  due  not  to  the  influence 
of  gifts,  but  should  be  conferred  only  after  a  diligent 
examination  and  the  favorable  testimony  of  numerous 
witnesses." 

To  these  regulations,  the  council  added  pro- 
hibitions of  practices  that  were  either  simoniacal 
or  could  easily  lead  to  simony.  Several  had  de- 
manded "  tremisses  "  for  the  small  portion  of  the 
blessed  chrism,  which  the  bishops  were  wont  to 
send  to  their  churches ;  thenceforth  nothing  should 
be  asked.  The  bishop  shall  not  exact  anything 
from  the  founder  of  a  church  who  has  asked  him 
to  consecrate  it.  If  the  latter  makes  a  spontaneous 
offering,  he  may,  however,  accept  it  (can.  v). 
Every  bishop  shall  instruct  his  clergy  that  they 
may  accept  what  is  freely  offered  for  the  baptism 
of  infants ;  but  they  shall  use  no  violence  to  extort 
a  gift  from  the  poor.  For  many  poor  people, 
dreading  such  violence,  postpone  the  baptism  of 
their  children.  The  deaths  without  baptism 
which  occur  during  such  delays,  are  necessarily 
chargeable  to  the  rapacious  authors  of  the  course 
adopted  by  the  parents  (canon  vii).^^ 


^Mansi,  ix,  838  seqq.;  Hefele,  ni,  29-30;  Gams,  Eg.  von 
Span.  II,  I,  462-64. 

9 


CHAPTER  VI 

SIMONY   AND    ANTI-SIMONIACAL    LEGISLATION    IN 
THE    EAST    FROM    476    TO    590 

Special  character  of  simony  in  the  East  —  The  question 
of  the  succession  to  Timothy  Solofacialus  in  the  see 
of  Alexandria  —  Theodosius  the  Coenobiarch  and  the 
emperor  Anastasius  —  John  the  Recluse  and  Anasta- 
sius  —  Paul,  patriarch  of  Alexandria  —  Justin  II  said 
to  have  been  guilty  of  simoniacal  dealings  —  Justinian's 
legislation  against  simony  —  Qualifications  of  the  epis- 
copal candidate  —  Payment  of  admission  fees  prohibited 
—  Oath  required  of  episcopal  electors  —  A  passage  of 
the  Nomocanon  of  John  Scholasticus  —  Anti-simoniacal 
legislation  in  Armenia  and  Syria. 

From  a  very  early  period  in  its  history  the 
East  had  been  agitated  by  doctrinal  discussions. 
To  such  an  excess  were  they  indulged  in  that 
they  soon  became,  as  is  well  known,  the  bane  of 
that  section  of  the  Christian  world.  One  of  the 
most  injurious  factors  in  this  matter  was  the 
pressure  which  the  civil  authority  repeatedly 
brought  to  bear  upon  its  subjects  to  force  certain 
tenets  upon  them.  Force,  bribery,  threats  and 
blandishments  were  resorted  to  in  order  to  assure 
the  triumph  of  this  or  that  doctrinal  cause. 
Liberal  pecuniary  donations  or  promises  of  sub- 
stantial advantages  were  made  to  supplement  the 
insufficiency  of  internal  persuasion. 
130  " 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  131 

On  the  death  of  Timothy  Solofacialus,  the 
orthodox  patriarch  of  Alexandria,  in  482,  the 
Monophjsite  party  gave  him  a  successor  in  the 
person  of  Peter  Mongns,  who  had  already  been 
deposed  from  the  see  of  Alexandria  by  the  em- 
peror Zeno  (474-91).  As  the  same  emperor  and 
Acacius,  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  now 
favored  Peter,  the  intervention  first  of  Pope  Sim- 
plicius  and  then  of  Pope  Felix  III  (II),  followed. 
Felix,  the  very  year  of  his  accession  (483)  sent 
two  legates  to  Constantinople,  Misenus,  bishop  of 
Cumae  and  Vitalis,  bishop  of  Truentum  in 
Southern  Italy.  They  were  bearers  of  letters  to 
Zeno  and  Acacius,  in  which  emperor  and  patri- 
arch were  urged  to  abandon  Peter  Mongus  and 
defend  the  doctrine  of  Chalcedon.  Acacius  was, 
moreover,  cited  to  appear  at  Rome  to  answer 
certain  charges  brought  against  him.  On  their 
way  to  Constantinople  the  two  papal  legates  were 
seized  at  Abydos,  on  the  Hellespont,  by  order  of  the 
emperor,  deprived  of  their  papers  and  summoned, 
under  threats,  to  hold  communion  with  Peter 
Mongus  and  Acacius.  But  the  violent  proceed- 
ings did  not  effect  any  change  in  their  dispositions. 
Measures  from  certain  points  of  view  more 
profitable  to  both  parties  were  resorted  to.  The 
legates  were  offered  money  for  a  change  of 
policy  and  showed  themselves  accessible  to  its 
persuasive  influences;  they  yielded  and  believed 


132  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

and  worshipped  with  Acacius  and  Peter  Mon- 
gus.^  The  pope  was  kept  informed  of  the 
doings  of  his  legates  at  Constantinople  hj  the 
Acoemetae  and  especially  by  their  abbot 
Cyril.  Misenus  and  Vitalis,  on  their  return  to 
Rome  (484),  were  judged  by  a  Roman  council 
which  deposed  and  excommunicated  them,  the 
penalty  to  last  until  Alexandria  should  again  re- 
ceive a  Catholic  bishop.^  Vitalis  died  before  the 
expiration  of  the  penalty ;  ^  Misenus  was  pardoned 
by  Pope  Gelasius.  The  same  Roman  council  also 
condemned  Acacius.  Letters  informing  the  em- 
peror, the  clergy  and  monks  of  Constantinople  of 
the  sentence  were  entrusted  by  Pope  Felix  to  Tutus, 
a  defensor  of  the  Roman  church.  Tutus,  like  his 
predecessors  Misenus  and  Vitalis,  yielded  to 
bribery,  and  like  them  was  excommunicated.* 
But  the  document  condemnatory  of  Acacius,  of 
which  he  was  the  bearer,  reached  its  destination 
through  the  Acoemetae  into  whose  possession  it 
had  fallen.  They  promulgated  it  by  fastening  it 
to  the  pontifical  robe  of  Acacius  when  he  was  about 

^Lib.  Pont.  I,  252;  Felix  III,  Epp.  Thiel  i,  245;  Theoph. 
Chronog.  Ad  ann.  480,  PG.  108,  324;  see  also  on  these 
events,  Jaffe,  Regest.  599-604;  Thiel,  i,  243-59,  518;  Evag. 
Hist.  Ecc.  Ill,  20,  21,  PG.  86  bis,  2637-41;  Liberatus, 
Breviar.  cc.   17,   18,  PL.  68,  1022  seqq. 

''Thiel,  I,  441.  Ubid.  446. 

*Jaff6,  Reg.  608;  Thiel,  i,  258;  see  Marin,  Moines  de 
Constantinople,  231   seq. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  133 

to  officiate  in  church.  Though  conscious  of  the 
proceeding,  the  patriarch  continued  the  service 
without  paying  the  least  attention  to  the  docu- 
ment, not  even  attempting  to  remove  it ;  but  during 
the  course  of  the  service  he  ordered  the  name  of 
Felix  III  to  be  erased  from  the  diptychs. 

Theodosius  the  Coenobiarch  (d.  c.  529),  one 
of  the  principal  organizers  of  monastic  life  in 
Palestine,  was  one  of  the  great  champions  of  the 
council  of  Chalcedon  at  the  time  of  the  emperor 
Anastasius  I  (491-518).  The  latter  did  all  in 
his  power  to  win  him  over  to  the  cause  of  Mono- 
physitism.  Theodore,  a  biographer  of  the  Coeno- 
biarch, relates  that  the  emperor  offered  Theodosius 
30  pounds  of  gold  to  induce  him  to  support 
Monophysitism.  The  offer  was  tendered  under 
the  guise  of  a  donation  towards  the  benefit  of 
the  sick  and  the  poor.  The  manner  in  which 
Theodosius  met  the  attempt  at  bribery  is  highly 
commended  by  his  biogi'apher.  He  accepted  the 
donation  and  thus  deprived  the  emperor  of  his 
money.  At  the  same  time  he  made  no  change  in 
his  doctrinal  views,  but  continued  to  uphold  the 
definitions  of  Chalcedon.^ 

The  accuracy  of  this  narrative  of  Theodore  is 
not  universally  admitted  to-day.  A  sum  of  money 
about  equal  to  the  amount  said  to  have  been  given 

'Usener,  Der  hi.  Theodosios  (Leipzig,  1890),  55  seqq, 
AA.  S8.  Jan.  i,   694. 


134  A   HISTORY   OF   SIMONY 

to  Theodosius,  was  donated  by  the  emperor  Anasta- 
sius  to  Sabas,  another  representative  of  Pales- 
tinian monasticism.  The  gift  was  bestowed  on 
Sabas  while  he  was  sojourning  at  Constanti- 
nople (winter,  511-512),  about  the  same  time  that 
Theodosius  is  said  to  have  been  bribed.  The 
donation,  by  no  means  in  the  nature  of  a  bribe, 
was  intended  for  all  the  monasteries  of  Palestine, 
and  part  of  it  was  distributed  among  those  of 
Theodosius.  These  circumstances  have  led  Use- 
ner  ^  to  the  conclusion  that  there  is  a  confusion 
in  Theodore's  narrative,  that  only  one  donation 
was  made,  viz.,  to  Sabas,  and  that  the  em- 
peror never  attempted  to  buy  over  Theodosius  to 
his  side.  It  must  be  admitted  with  Zeck  '^  that 
the  explanation  is  not  devoid  of  all  probability. 
The  name  of  the  same  emperor  also  figures 
in  another  incident,  but  in  an  entirely  different 
manner.  According  to  Theophanes,^  John  II,  the 
Recluse  or  Niciota,  Monophysite  patriarch  of 
Alexandria  from  507  to  517,  offered  the  emperor 
Anastasius  200  pounds  of  gold  on  condition 
that  he  would  procure  the  complete  abrogation 
of  the  decrees  of  Chalcedon.  The  offer  was  un- 
seemly and,  as  is  evident  from  what  has  been 
related   above,   unnecessary,    for   Anastasius   was 

'Op.    cit.    156,   55,    1. 

'  Kirchenlex.  s.   v.  Theodosius, 

^Chronog.  Ad  ann.  502,  PG.  108,  1,  357. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  135 

already  working  for  the  destruction  of  the  ecu- 
menical enactments. 

Paul,  also  a  patriarch  of  Alexandria  (c.  538- 
42),  owed  his  elevation  to  that  see  to  the  emperor 
Justinian.  As  he  seemed  to  have  been  implicated 
in  the  murder  of  the  Alexandrian  deacon  Psoilus, 
the  council  of  Gaza  (c.  542)  decreed  his  depo- 
sition.'' He  tried  to  obtain  his  restoration  by 
offering  a  sum  of  money  to  his  imperial  master, 
and  would  probably  have  succeeded  in  his  attempt, 
had  not  Pope  Vigilius  refused  his  consent  to  the 
reappointment.  ^  ^ 

At  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century,  from 
about  510  to  518,  Bishop  Peter,  a  man  of  the 
stamp  of  Paul  of  Samosata,  occupied  the  metro- 
politan see  of  Apamea  in  Syria  Secunda.  In  this 
position  he  committed  excesses  of  such  a  revolting 
nature  that  the  clergy  and  monks  under  his  juris- 
diction drew  up  a  list  of  accusations  against  him. 
The  clergy  insisted  especially  on  the  immoral 
conduct  of  the  bishop;  but  they  also  accused  him 
of  performing  venal  ordinations  and  made  special 
mention  in  this  regard  of  the  ordination  of  the 
perfumer  Antiochus.^^  The  first  formal  com- 
plaint was  lodged  with  Count  Eutychianus, 
governor   of   the   province,    and   shortly   after   in 

'  On  the  council  of  Gaza,  see  Hefele,  Cg.  il,  785-86, 
^°  Procop.  Caesar.  Hist.  Arcan.  c.  27. 
"Mansi,  vui,  1106. 


136  A  HISTORY  OF   SIMONY 

518  the  accusations  were  brought  before  the 
council  of  Constantinople.  The  charge  of  re- 
ceiving payment  for  ordination  was  not  especially 
considered  at  the  synod;  but  a  sentence  of  depo- 
sition was  pronounced  against  Peter.  A  later 
attempt  made  by  him  to  regain  ecclesiastical  in- 
fluence and  position  was  not  successful:  another 
council  of  Constantinople  (536)  confirmed  his 
condemnation.^^ 

While  the  personal  piety  and  orthodoxy  of  the 
emperor  Justin  II  (565-578)  are  generally  com- 
mended by  the  writers  of  his  time,  his  ecclesiastical 
policy  is  revealed  to  us  in  a  very  unfavorable 
light  in  the  writings  of  Evagrius.  This  historian 
(whose  statements  ought  to  be  accepted  with  the 
greatest  reserve ),^^  tells  us  that  Justin,  previous 
to  his  accession  to  the  imperial  throne,  demanded 
money  of  Anastasius,  patriarch  of  Antioch,  proba- 
bly for  his  elevation  to  the  episcopal  dignity. 
The  patriarch's  refusal  to  comply  with  the  request 
produced  such  intense  and  prolonged  resentment 
in  Justin  that  it  partly  accounts  for  the 
later  deposition  of  Anastasius  (570).^^  During 
Justin's  reign,  according  to  the  same  writer,  any- 
thing could  be  obtained  from  the  emperor  with 

"Mansi,  viii,    1139-1142. 

"See  Groh,  Gesch.  des  ostrom.  Kaisers  Justin  II   (Leip- 
zig, 1889),  8-9. 

"Evag.  Hist.  Ecc.  Lib.  v,  c,  5,  PG.   86  bis,  2801-2804. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  137 

money.  Things  ecclesiastical  were  no  exception. 
Bishoprics  were  publicly  put  up  for  sale  and 
auctioned  off  to  the  first  comer.  ^^ 

These  proceedings  were  directly  contrary  to  the 
laws  of  Justin's  immediate  predecessor  and  im- 
perial uncle,  Justinian  the  Great.  Justinian 
(527'-65),  who  displayed  a  pronounced  tendency 
to  legislate  in  religious  as  well  as  in  civil 
matters/*^  had  issued  stringent  and  extensive 
regulations  in  the  interest  of  ecclesiastical  in- 
tegrity. In  528  he  renewed  the  provisions  of 
the  council  of  Chalcedon  and  those  of  the  syno- 
dical  letter  of  Gennadius,  decreeing  deposition 
against  any  simoniacal  church  official,  cleric  or 
lay.^'^  Among  the  episcopal  qualifications  enu- 
merated in  his  "  ISTovels  "  the  absence  of  venality 
figures  as  an  element.  ^^  ISTot  content  with  this 
general  statement,  the  lawgiver  speaks  more  in 
detail  on  the  matter.  The  candidate,  he  tells  us,^^ 
should  not  buy  his  elevation  with  money  nor 
receive  it  for  any  gift,  but  obtain  it  gratuitously. 
Should  proof  be  brought  forward  that  he  bought 
the  episcopate  with  money  or  other  valuable 
objects,   even  though  he  possessed   all  the  other 

"Evag.  op.  cit.  V,  1,  PG.  86  bis,  2789. 
"  See  Bury, Hist,  of  the  Later  Roman  Empire  (London  and 
N.   Y.    1889),   II,    1    seqq. 
"Cod.  L.  I.  Tit.  Ill,  XLi. 
"  Nov.  VI,  c.  I,  5.  "  Ibid.  9. 


138  A   HISTORY   OF   SIMONY 

qualifications,  both  he  and  his  consecrator  shall  lose 
their  dignity.  Thus,  on  the  one  hand,  the  hopes 
of  the  candidate  will  not  be  fulfilled,  and,  on  the 
other,  the  recipient  of  the  reward,  if  he  be  a 
bishop  or  other  cleric,  will  also  lose  his  dignity 
and  forfeit  the  sum  received  in  payment.  The 
price  will  revert  to  the  Church  which  suffered 
by  the  transaction.  Should  a  layman  have  ac- 
cepted money  or  any  other  object  for  his  support 
in  the  election,  divine  punishment,  it  is  true,  will 
be  meted  out  to  him;  but,  in  addition,  he  shall 
forfeit  the  remuneration  he  received  and  pay 
double  the  amount  to  the  Church,^*^  and  if  he  be 
a  government  ofiicial,  he  shall  lose  his  position 
and  incur  perpetual  banishment.  The  one  who, 
being  a  deacon  or  priest,  obtains  the  episcopate 
through  bribery,  shall  be  deposed,  not  only  as 
bishop,  but  also  as  deacon  or  priest  respectively. 
These  enactments  are  to  be  brought  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  candidates  in  presence  of  the  people. 

An  edict  addressed  by  Justinian  to  Mennas,  the 
patriarch  of  Constantinople  (536-52),^^  reveals 
the  clergy  of  the  East  in  a  rather  unfavorable 
light.  The  emperor  himself  tells  us  why  he  issued 
the  letter.  The  clerics  of  various  churches,  but 
not  those  of  Constantinople,  had  frequently  com- 

"  On  this  see  also  Nov.  CXXIII,  c.  ii,  where  the  state- 
ment regarding  restitution  is  more  detailed. 
^Nov.  LVI. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  139 

plained  to  him  of  the  arbitrary  admission  fee 
levied  on  them  by  the  clergy  belonging  to  the 
diocese  or  parish,  in  which  they  sought  to  obtain 
positions.  The  practice  seems  to  have  been  pretty 
general,  as  we  may  safely  assume  that  not  all 
those  who  were  required  to  pay  the  tax  com- 
plained, and  yet  the  complaints  received  by  Justi- 
nian were  numerous.  As  a  remedy,  the  emperor 
decreed  that  in  every  church  except  that  of  Con- 
stantinople, where  the  former  practice  might  con- 
tinue in  existence,  it  should  be  prohibited  for  any 
cleric  to  accept  a  price  of  admission.  If  any  one 
should  violate  this  provision,  he  was  to  be  deposed 
and  the  applicant  for  admission  to  be  installed  in 
his  place.  This  regulation  was  to  apply  also  to 
the  church  advocates  of  Constantinople,  upon 
whom  a  fine  of  ten  pounds  would  be  imposed  if 
negligence  in  this  line  could  be  proved  against 
them. 

The  stipulations  of  the  letter  to  Mennas  did 
not  extend  to  the  bishops.  These  were  allowed  to 
give  presents  of  enthronement.  Justinian  -^  de- 
termined that  the  sum  that  could  be  lawfully  given 
should  be  proportionate  to  the  revenues  of  the 
respective  churches.  Only  the  bishops  of  very 
poor  churches  were  forbidden  to  give  presents  of 
this  kind. 

^iTov.  CXXIII,  c.  in. 


140  A  HISTORY  OF   SIMONY 

In  another  passage  of  the  same  [N^ovel  ^^  Justi- 
nian again  treats  of  these  two  points :  the  episcopal 
election  and  the  admission  tax.  He  repeats  what 
he  had  already  decreed,-^  viz.,  that  this  legislation 
applied  to  the  presidents  of  all  charitable  insti- 
tutions (as  the  xenodochos,  ptochotrophos,  nosoco- 
mos)  and  to  any  ecclesiastical  official  whatsoever. 
The  statutory  penalties  would  also  be  incurred  by 
persons  acting  as  intermediaries  in  the  trans- 
actions. 

Proceeding  still  further  and  wishing  to  exclude 
all  undue  influence  from  the  electors  of  the  bishop, 
Justinian  ^^  ordained  that  the  clergy  and  the 
principal  men  of  the  city  {tov<;  K\r}pLKOv^  KaC  roifi 
•jrp(i)Tov<i  T?)?  TTo'Xeft)?)  in  which  the  ordination 
was  to  take  place,  should  meet  and  take  an  oath 
(which  they  would  commit  to  writing),  that,  in 
casting  their  vote  they  had  been  prompted  neither 
by  gifts,  promises,  friendship,  nor  any  other  un- 
worthy motive,  but  solely  by  their  conscience  and 
their  obedience  to  the  canons.  The  bishop-elect 
was  to  swear  that  he  neither  gave  nor  promised 
anything  either  through  himself  or  an  interme- 
diary; and  that  he  would  not  give  anything  for 
his  elevation,  either  to  the  one  who  would  ordain 

'^Nov.  CXXIII,  c.  XVI. 

'^  Codex,  Lib.  I,  Tit.  iii,  XLi. 

'^Nov.   CXXXVII,   c.    n. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  141 

him,  those  who  cast  their  votes  for  him,  or  any 
other  person.-*^ 

Justinian  wished  to  exclude  the  very  "  appear- 
ance of  gain  and  negotiation  "  from  the  Church 
and,  for  this  reason,  forbade,  as  ecclesiastical 
authorities  frequently  did,  the  passing  of  an 
ecclesiastic  from  one  diocese  to  another. ^^ 

With  what  servility  the  clergy  of  the  East 
accepted  the  enactments  of  the  civil  power,  we 
gather  from  a  passage  in  the  ]!Tomocanon  (Tit. 
XVI )  of  John  Scholasticus,  patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople (SGS-VT).  It  is  freely  admitted  therein 
that  the  reception  of  gifts  for  ordinations  is 
simoniacal  and  against  the  law  of  Christ  and  the 
Apostles.  But  the  acceptance  of  such  rewards 
being  permitted  by  an  imperial  constitution,  the 
writer  in  the  ISTomocanon  concludes  that  the  law 
of  Jesus  Christ  should  be  disregarded  and  that 
of  the  emperor  observed.  ^^ 

^  A  similar  oath  is  taken  at  the  present  day  in  the 
United  States  by  the  eonsultors  and  the  irremovable  rectors, 
who  have  a  right  to  propose  three  candidates  for  the  vacant 
episcopal  see  of  the  diocese  to  which  they  belong.  Before 
casting  their  votes,  they  swear  that  their  choice  was  not 
due  to  hope  of  either  favor  or  reward.  (Acta  et  Decreta 
Cone.  Plen.  Bait.  Ill  (Baltimore,  1886),  Tit.  n,  15,  p.  13; 
see  O'Gorman,  The  Cath.  Church  in  the  U.  8.  (N.  Y.  1902), 
4th  ed.  467.) 

^Nov.  Ill,   c.  II. 

-^  Pitra,  Jur.  Eccl.  Oraec.  Hist,  ii,  424.  See  Thomassin, 
Vetus  et  Nova  Discip.  vu,  455. 


142  A   HISTORY  OF   SIMONY 

A  few  words  must  also  be  said  here  concerning 
the  enactments  prohibitive  of  simony  in  Armenia 
and  Syria.  Previous  to  this  period,  the  Arme- 
nian church  had  already  spoken  on  the  matter. 
Its  most  ancient  canons,  which  go  under  the  name 
of  Gregory  the  Illuminator,  called  down  on  any 
priest  or  layman  who  receives  a  remuneration  for 
sacred  things,  the  curse  of  Simon  Magus,  the  fate 
of  the  traitor  Judas,  and  on  his  mind  the  leprosy 
of  Giezi.^^  The  patriarch,  Isaac  the  Great  (c. 
390-439),  denouncing  the  cupidity  of  the  bishops, 
who,  in  their  pursuit  of  presents,  ordained  igno- 
rant and  objectionable  candidates  and  hosts  of 
their  relatives,  decreed  deposition  against  any 
bishop  guilty  of  this  offence.^"  The  council  of 
Chahapivan,  held  in  44Y,  a  few  years  after  his 
death,  pronounced  excommunication  against  the 
giver  and  the  recipient  of  any  ordination  fee,  no 
matter  what  its  nature. ^^ 

Of  special  significance  in  this  connection  are  the 
canons  of  the  second  council  of  Dwin  (Tuin  or 
Dovin),  held  in  554,  under  the  catholicos  JSTerses 
II  (c.  548-557).^^     In  them  we  have  in  the  first 

^''Mai,  Script.  Vet.  Nova  Collectio  (Rome,  1838),  x, 
270,  can.  26. 

'"Mai,  Ibid.  286.  »^Mai,  Ibid.  295,  can.   16. 

'^  There  is  considerable  difficulty  in  determining  the 
number  and  chronology  of  the  synods  of  Dovin.  We  have 
followed  Ter-Minassiantz,  Die  Armenische  Kirche  in  ihren 
Beziehungen   zu   den   Syrischen   Kirchen    (Leipzig,    1904), 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  143 

place  a  prohibition  directed  against  priests  who 
deprive  clerics  of  their  share  of  the  sacred  offer- 
ings, thus  forcing  them  to  make  gifts  for  Holy 
Mass.^^  They  contain  also  a  proscription  of 
certain  rather  superfluous  blessings,  which  seemed 
to  reveal  in  those  who  pronounced  them  an  in- 
ordinate desire  of  acquiring  money.^^  In  the 
seventeenth  canon  the  sacrament  of  penance  is 
for  the  first  time  explicitly  and  emphatically 
referred  to  in  anti-simoniacal  legislation.  It 
reads :  "  Priests  shall  not  dare  to  put  up  at 
auction  the  sacrament  of  penance;  but  they  shall 
with  all  care  and  sound  doctrine  admonish  the 
penitents,  who  are  their  neighbors,  to  provide  for 
their  eternal  salvation.  They  shall  not  receive 
from  them  any  reward  in  the  nature  of  a  public 
stipend;  for  freely  have  we  received  and  freely 
we  give."  ^^ 

The  factions  which  divided  Western  cities  at 
episcopal  elections  were  also  in  evidence  among 
the  Syriac-speaking  Kestorians.  Among  them,  as 
in  the  West,  recourse  was  had  to  protection  and 
patronage  to  obtain  bishoprics  for  personages 
whose  episcopal  qualifications  were  not  very  evi- 
dent.    Identical  evils  were  met  by  identical  regii- 

32,  n.  1  and  42,  n.  1.  See  Petit  in  Diet.  Theol.  Cath.  i, 
1927. 

^Mai,  op.  cit.  272-73,  can.  2. 

'^Mai,   ibid.   can.   26.  ==  Mai,  ibid.  275. 


144  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

lations.  There  is,  therefore,  but  little  difference 
in  the  anti-simoniacal  legislation  of  Eastern 
JSTestorians  and  of  Western  Catholics.  Severe  pun- 
ishments were  decreed  in  the  Kestorian  Church 
against  all  those  who  participated  in  coalitions 
and  plots  to  raise,  in  an  illegal  manner,  a  person 
of  their  choice  to  the  local  episcopal  see.^®  Re- 
course to  the  patronage  of  Christian  lajmen  or 
influential  pagans  to  obtain  priestly  ordination  or 
a  bishopric  was  prohibited  under  penalty  of  de- 
position for  the  person  who  secured  the  honor  and 
of  excommunication  for  the  faithful  who  procured 
it  for  him.^'^  The  custom  of  obtaining  a  transfer 
from  one  church  to  another  for  lucrative  motives, 
which  seems  to  have  been  practised  more  shame- 
lessly in  the  East  than  in  the  West,  was  also  put 
under  the  ban.^^  Along  with  these  measures  of 
a  preventive  character,  laws  directly  banishing 
simony  existed.  As  an  instance  of  these,  we  shall 
cite  the  twentieth  canon  of  the  council  held  at 
Seleucia-Ctesiphon  in  576: 

'*  Chabot,  Synodicon  Orientale,  357,  canon  IV  of  the 
synod  held  in  the  year  554  under  the  catholicos  Joseph 
at  Seleucia-Ctesiphon;  ibid.  386,  canon  xxxiii  of  the  synod 
of  576. 

"Chabot,  op.  cit.  355-56,  canon  I;  357,  can.  ill;  386, 
can.   XXXIV. 

^'  Chabot,  ibid.  357-58,  can.  v ;  359,  can.  vili ;  383,  can. 
XXIV. 


FROM    THE    YEAR    476    TO    590  145 

"  As  the  sublime  gift  of  the  priesthood,  through 
which  celestial  goods  are  communicated  to  men  and 
by  which  is  accomplished  and  completed  the  Provi- 
dence of  the  Creator  towards  the  creature,  has  been 
given  to  the  Church  by  the  Holy  Spirit :  it  is  for- 
bidden by  the  word  of  Christ,  for  metropolitans  and 
bishops,  to  confer  it  (the  priesthood)  for  presents 
or  to  sell  it  for  a  price;  for  it  is  sublime  and  greater 
than  the  world  and  all  it  contains.  And  such  as 
believe  they  give  it  in  this  manner  purchase  for 
themselves  hell  and  the  torments  awaiting  the  im- 
pious in  the  world  to  come;  and  their  intercourse 
and  sojourn  will  be  with  Simon,  who  thought  that 
the  gift  of  God  may  be  acquired  with  the  goods  of 
this  world.  And  if  a  metropolitan  or  a  bishop 
become  guilty  of  these  offences :  the  one  who  thought 
he  was  giving  the  priesthood  and  he  who  thought  he 
was  receiving  it,  shall  be  completely  deprived  of  their 
orders  and  of  all  ecclesiastical  ministry."  ^^ 


'"  Chabot,  ibid.  382.     See  also  for  enactments  of  a  later 
date  to  which  reference  is  more  convenient  here,  ibid.  483-84, 
can.  Ill;   485,  can.  vil,  and  622. 
10 


CHAPTER  VII 

GREGORY   THE    GREAT   AND    SIMONY    IN   THE 
WEST    (590-604) 

I.  Italy: — State  of  Italy  at  Gregory's  accession  —  Testi- 
mony of  Agnellus  relative  to  the  prevalence  of  simony 
—  Gregory  and  the  archiepiscopal  see  of  Milan  — 
Gregory  and  Januarius  —  The  former's  instructions  to 
Castorius —  Council  of  Rome  (595);  its  decree  against 
simony.  II.  France: — Political  division  of  France  at 
Gregory's  accession  —  Ecclesiastical  conditions  —  State- 
ments regarding  the  existence  of  simony  —  Gregory's 
letter  to  Bishop  Vergilius  of  Aries  —  Other  letters  of 
his  —  He  writes  to  Queen  Brunehilde  —  His  letter  of 
599  to  the  bishops  of  Gaul  —  Convocation  of  a  council 
urged  —  Another  letter  to  the  queen  —  Fruitlessness  of 
the  pope's  efforts  —  New  campaign  against  the  evil  — 
Letters  to  bishops  and  kings  —  Council  to  be  held  — 
Gregory's  efforts  are  again  fruitless  —  Simony  in  Spain. 

I.     Gregory  and  Italy 

The  state  of  confusion,  distress  and  desolation, 
which  was  prevalent  both  in  the  East  and  in  the 
West  when  Gregory  the  Great  ascended  the  ponti- 
fical throne,  was  naturally  favorable  to  the  exist- 
ence and  spread  of  simony.  Sadder  than  that  of 
many  other  lands  was  the  condition  of  Italy. 
In  a  comparatively  very  short  time  she  had  been 
overrun  by  several  Barbarian  nations.  "  First 
came  the  Goth,  then  the  Hun,  and  then  the  Lom- 
146 


GREGORY  THE  GREAT  AXD  SOIONY   147 

bard.  The  Goth  took  possession,  but  he  was  of 
uoble  nature  and  soon  lost  his  barbarism.  The 
Hun  came  next,  he  was  irreclaimable,  but  did  not 
stay.  The  Lombard  kept  both  his  savageness  and 
his  ground ;  he  appropriated  to  himself  the  terri- 
tory, not  the  civilization  of  Italy,  fierce  as  the 
Hun  and  powerful  as  the  Goth,  the  most  tre- 
mendous scourge  of  Heaven."  ^  When  Gregory 
became  pope  jS^orthern  Italy  was  mostly  in 
possession  of  the  Lombards,  while  Istria,  Venetia, 
Genoa,  Ravenna  and  the  Pentapolis,  and  consider- 
able part  of  the  South  of  the  peninsula,  as  well 
as  the  islands  of  Sicily,  Sardinia  and  Corsica 
were  under  the  at  least  nominal  dominion  of  the 
Eastern  emperor.^  Rome  never  fell  into  the 
hands  of  the  Lombards,  and  when  the  people  chose 
Gregory  as  pope,  their  choice  had  to  be  ratified 
by  the  government  of  Constantinople.  It  w^as 
the  custom  of  the  newly-elected  pope's  predeces- 
sors to  ask  for  the  confirmation  of  their  election. 
Gregory,  too,  applied  to  the  emperor,  but  it  was 
to  beseech  him  not  to  sanction  the  selection  made 

*  Newman,  Hist.  Sketches,  iii,  110  (London,  1894).  On 
the  condition  of  the  world  at  Gregory's  accession,  see  Mann, 
Lives  of  the  Popes  in  the  Early  Middle  Ages,  I,  l,  5-15; 
Dudden,  Gregory  the  Great   (London,  1905),  i,  357  seqq. 

-  For  the  sake  of  convenience,  we  treat  here  of  the  parts 
of  Italy  subject  to  the  Eastern  emperors,  instead  of  speak- 
ing of  imperial  and  non-imperial  Italy  in  two  different 
places. 


148  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

by  the  Romans.^  It  was  an  extreme  but  fruitless 
attempt  to  escape  from  the  dreaded  responsibility 
of  the  supreme  pontificate.  Gregory  was  con- 
strained to  accept  the  honor  and  burden  for  the 
glory  of  the  Church  and  the  benefit  of  humanity. 
Among  his  many  titles  to  fame,  he  also  enjoys 
the  distinction  of  being  the  most  energetic  oppo- 
nent of  simony  of  the  first  six  Christian  centuries. 
The  necessity  of  such  a  champion  of  integrity  in 
the  sanctuary  at  the  very  moment  when  Gregory 
appeared  as  the  supreme  ruler  of  the  Christian 
world,  is  forcibly  demonstrated  by  a  passage  found 
in  Agnellus,  the  eighth-century  historian  of  the 
church  of  Ravenna.  Speaking  of  Marinian,  a 
Roman  who  became  bishop  of  Ravenna  in  595,  he 
writes : 

"  Marinian  was  not  like  others  who  prey  upon 
(devorant)  the  possessions  of  the  Church  in  order 
to  secure  the  episcopal  dignity,  who  take  the  revenues 
of  their  fellow-men  and  become  debtors,  and  who, 
if  competition  arises  between  two  persons,  buy  this 
exalted  dignity  at  the  price  for  which  one  may  sell 
it.  They  send  about  agents  to  ascertain  how  much 
money  an  opponent  is  willing  to  spend.  If  the  an- 
swer is,  say  500  solidi,  the  rival  candidate  laughs  at 
the  paltry  sum.  '  I,'  he  says,  '  will  give  1,000. 
Pray,  tell  the  bishop  who  is  to  ordain  me :  It  is 

'Greg,  of  Tours,  Hist.  Franc,  x,  1,  MGH.  SS.  Rer.  Mer. 
1,  407. 


GKEGORY   THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY       149 

better  for  him  to  accept  my  thousand  solidi  than 
those  few.'  The  wretches  do  not  realize  that  they 
are  adherents  of  the  simoniacal  heresy.*  And  how 
is  it  possible  tliat  they  do  not  realize  it  in  face  of 
the  Pontiff's  protest  and  prohibition :  °  '  Avoid  be- 
coming tainted  with  simony  either  through  gift  or 
promise.'  Are  they  not  conscious  of  their  double 
sin?  They  give  and  receive  money  secretly,  and  in 
public  they  deny  doing  it.  Do  you  not  remember, 
you  wretches,  that  what  you  deny  before  men,  will 
be  made  plain  before  the  eyes  of  God,  before  the 
Angels  and  Archangels,  before  the  Principalities  and 
Powers,  before  the  Thrones  and  Dominations,  before 
the  heavenly  armies  and  forces  (virtutihus)  ;  there 
everything  hidden  and  secret  will  be  made  public. 
You  aspire  to  the  highest  dignity?  Consider  the 
labors  of  the  struggle.  What  does  it  profit  you  to 
be  clothed  with  rich  garments,  if  the  soul  is  caught 
in  the  snares  of  Satan?  Does  it  appear  insigni- 
ficant to  you  to  hold  ecclesiastical  government? 
If  you  would  only  stop  to  consider,  the  bishop  is 
more  than  a  king."  ^ 

Marinian  ruled  as  archbishop  from  595  to  about 
606,  and  Agnellus,  in  this  passage,  evidently 
speaks  at  least  of  these  eleven  years.     The  tone 

*  "  Simoniacas  hereses  sectantur." 

'It  is  not  clear  who  is  meant;  perhaps  it  is  Gregory  the 
Great. 

« Agnell.  Lib.  Pont.  Ecc.  Rav.  100,  in  MGH.  8S.  Rer.  Long, 
et  Ital.  ed.  Holder-Egger   (Hanover,  1878),  343-44. 


150  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

of  his  language  plainly  indicates,  however,  that 
his  intention  is  not  to  speak  exclusively  of  the 
time  of  Marinian's  episcopal  rule,  but  that  he 
refers  to  the  events  of  a  period,  brief  perhaps, 
but  which  we  certainly  do  not  lengthen  excessively 
when  we  make  it  begin  with  the  reign  of  Gregory 
the  Great  in  590. 

The  archiepiscopal  see  of  Milan,  the  occupants 
of  which  had  been  forced  in  569,  by  the  invasion 
of  the  Lombards,  to  take  up  their  residence  in 
Genoa,  became  vacant  twice  during  Gregory's  reign. 
Archbishop  Laurentius  died  in  592,  and  the  pontiff 
in  his  directions  to  the  clergy  of  Milan  for  the 
election  of  a  successor  wished  them  not  to  seek 
their  own  gain  and  private  interests ;  for  cupidity 
would  prevent  them  from  arriving  at  an  unbiased 
decision. ''^  The  deacon  Constantius  was  chosen 
for  the  ofBce,  but  died  in  the  year  600  at  Genoa. 
The  king  of  the  Lombards,  Agilulf ,  now  attempted 
to  obtain  the  nomination  of  his  own  candidate; 
but  Gregory  energetically  declared  to  the  clergy 
of  the  diocese  his  intention  of  never  accepting  a 
person  chosen  for  the  position  by  the  Lombards.^ 
It  was  a  prudent  move  not  to  make  any  concessions 
in  this  respect  to  the  royal  power. 

A  source  of  worry  for  the  supreme  Head  of 
the   Church   and   an  object   of  frequent  fruitless 

'Epp.  in,  29.  ^Epp.  XI,  6. 


GREGOHY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY        151 

admonition  was  Jannarins,  bishop  of  Cagliari,  the 
metropolitan  see  of  Sardinia  (c.  591-604).  A 
most  unflattering  portrait  of  this  irresponsible  old 
man  is  given  by  Dndden  in  his  "  History  of  Gre- 
gory the  Great."  ^  The  condition  of  the  Church  in 
Sardinia  was  deplorable  and,  while  it  would  be  un- 
just to  lay  all  the  existing  disorder  at  the  door 
of  Januarius,  it  must  be  said  that  he  was  re- 
sponsible to  a  great  extent.  Among  the  com- 
plaints that  ])oured  into  Rome  from  all  sides  was 
the  accusation  that  in  the  diocese  of  Cagliari  a 
fee  was  accepted  for  ecclesiastical  functions.  In 
a  letter  which  he  wrote  to  the  bishop  in  May,  594, 
Gregory  prohibited  the  acceptance  of  a  remunera- 
tion for  ordinations,  the  marriage  of  (inferior) 
clerics,  or  the  veiling  of  virgins.  A  spontaneous 
offering,  however,  could  be  received.  ^'^  At  a 
slightly  later  date,  Januarius  tried  to  collect  three 
solidi  from  Nereida,  a  noble  lady,  for  the  burying- 
place  of  her  daughter.  He  received  another 
communication  from  the  pope  (598)  in  which  his 
action  was  censured: 

"  It  is  very  reprehensible  and  unbecoming  the 
episcopal  office  to  seek  payment  for  earth  granted  to 
rottenness  and  to  wish  to  profit  by  another's  grief. 
.  .  .  Wlierefore  I  admonish  you  never  to  presume  to 

»i,  366-70. 

^"Regist.  Epp.  iv,  24,  MOH.  Epp.  I,  259,  ed.  Ewald 
(Berlin,   1887);   Jafle,  Reg.   1296. 


152  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

repeat  such  a  manifestation  of  avarice,  not  even  in 
the  case  of  a  stranger.  Should  you  at  any  time  grant 
permission  to  any  person  to  be  buried  in  your  church, 
we  do  not  forbid  you  to  accept  the  free  contribution 
which  the  parents,  relatives,  or  heirs  of  the  deceased 
may  desire  to  make  for  the  lights;  but  we  do  abso- 
lutely forbid  you  to  demand  or  exact  payment,  lest 
the  Church  (and  this  is  most  contrary  to  religion) 
be  called  venal  (which  God  forbid),  and  you,  by 
endeavoring  to  profit  by  men's  bodies,  seem  to  rejoice 
in  their  death."  ^^ 

The  previous  year  (597)  Gregory  had  already 
written  to  the  same  effect  to  Doniis,  bishop  of 
Messina.-^-  In  both  instances  he  reminded  his 
correspondents  of  the  fact  that  the  objectionable 
practice  was  an  old  custom  at  Rome  when  he 
ascended  the  pontifical  throne,  but  that  he  sup- 
pressed it  entirely  in  his  church. ^^ 

How  anxious  the  pope  was  to  exclude  all  pri- 
vate interest  and  venality  from  episcopal  elections, 
appears  from  a  letter  addressed  February  10,  595, 
to  Castorius,  his  representative  at  Ravenna.  He 
wrote : 

"  The  news  of  the  death  of  our  brother  and  fellow- 
bishop  John  has  greatly  grieved  us,  chiefiy  because  the 

^Epp.    vm,   35;    Jaffg,   Reg.    1524. 
"Epp.  VIII,   3;    Jaffg,  Reg.    1490. 

"The  reader  may  see  on  these  events  Dudden,  Greg,  the 
Great,  i,  400-01. 


GREGORY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY        153 

city  (Ravenna)  has  been  deprived  at  this  time  of  the 
consolation  of  pastoral  care.  As  many  reasons  demand 
the  immediate  creation,  with  Christ's  indispensable 
cooperation,  of  a  bishop  for  this  church,  we  command 
your  Experience,  to  impress  upon  the  clergy  and 
people  the  necessity  of  electing  a  bishop  without 
delay.  We  wish  you  to  urge  them,  before  all  else, 
to  set  aside  private  interests  in  a  public  concern 
like  this.  Hence,  let  there  be  no  venality  in  this 
election,  lest  the  electors,  while  they  run  after  re- 
wards, lose  their  sense  of  discrimination,  and  judge 
worthy  of  this  office  the  one  who  has  pleased  them 
by  his  munificence  rather  than  by  his  merits.  Bring 
especially  to  the  knowledge  of  the  electors,  and  make 
them  realize,  the  fact  that  whosoever  presumes  to 
purchase  for  a  price  the  gift  of  God,  is  not  only 
unworthy  of  the  episcopate,  but  will  also  certainly 
be  found  addicted  to  other  vices.  Let,  therefore, 
merit  and  not  the  profuseness  of  rewards  decide  in 
favor  of  the  candidate.  For  both  the  elected  and  the 
electors  are  liable  to  punishment  if  they  attempt, 
by  their  sacrilegious  proceedings,  to  violate  the  true 
episcopal  character."  ^* 

On  July  5  of  the  same  year,  595,  Gregory 
held  in  the  basilica  of  St.  Peter  at  Rome  a  synod 
attended  by  twenty-three  bishops  and  numerous 
priests  and  deacons.  The  bishops  represented, 
with  the  exception  of  the  one  of  Ravenna,  only 

^*Epp.  v,  24;   Jaffg,    1335. 


154  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

the  suburbicarian  dioceses.  On  motion  of  Gre- 
gory, six  decrees  were  approved  by  the  assembled 
Fathers.  Wisbaum  ^^  sees  in  these  six  enactments 
a  collection  of  canons  issued  by  Roman  synods  at 
the  beginning  of  Gregory's  reign.  How  he  arrived 
at  this  conclusion,  he  does  not  say.  He  probably 
based  it  partly  on  John  the  Deacon's  assertion,^** 
that  the  decree  of  the  year  595  respecting  simony, 
was  a  new  promulgation  of  a  law  which  had 
already  been  published  at  a  council  in  the  initial 
period  of  Gregory's  pontificate.  This  decree 
which  is  said  to  have  been  merely  repeated  at  the 
council  of  595,  reads  as  follows: 

"  In  pursuance  of  the  ancient  rule  of  the  Fathers, 
I  decree  that  no  fee  shall  ever  be  received  for  ordi- 
nations, or  the  conferring  of  the  pallium,  or  the 
writing-out  of  the  charters  relating  thereto,  or  for 
what  is  called  through  a  new  subterfuge  invented  by 
ambition,  the  impression  of  the  seal  (pastellum). 
The  pontiff  lays  his  hands  upon  the  bishop  who  is 
to  be  consecrated,  the  minister  reads  the  gospel,  and 
the  notary  writes  out  the  letter  of  confirmation.  It 
is  just  as  wrong  for  the  minister  or  notary  to  sell 
respectively  his  voice  or  pen  for  the  consecration, 
as  it  is  for  the  pontiff  to  sell  the  laying  on  of  his 
hand.  Wherefore  I  absolutely  forbid  the  person  who 
is  to  be  ordained  or  has  been  ordained  to  pay  any 

"  Die  wichtigsten  Richtungen  u.  Ziele  der  Tatigkeit  Ore- 
gors  des  Grossen    (Cologne,  s.  d.),  52,  Thesis,  ni. 
^'Vita  Qreg.  Lib.  ni,  c.  5. 


GREGORY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY        155 

fee  for  ordination,  the  pallium,  the  charters  or  the 
seal  (pastellum).  If  any  one  should  presume  to 
demand  or  exact  any  compensation  for  the  things 
just-mentioned,  his  guilt  will  appear  in  the  severe 
judgment  of  God  Almighty.  If,  after  the  reception 
of  the  charters  or  the  pallium,  the  ordained  party 
wishes  to  make  a  donation  to  any  one  of  the  clergy, 
not  indeed  in  compliance  with  an  agreement  or  in 
satisfaction  of  a  demand  or  an  exaction,  but  merely 
as  a  gracious  favor,  we  do  not  in  any  way  forbid 
the  acceptance  of  his  reward.  For  his  gift  is  not 
defiled  by  sin,  as  it  is  not  extorted  by  the  improper 
solicitations  of  the  recipient."  ^^ 

We  have  preferred  to  render  the  word  "  pastel- 
lum," which  occurs  twice  in  the  canon,  by  the 
English  term  "  seal."  This  interpretation,  instead 
of  "  small  repast,  gratuity,"  which  is  the  one 
Hefele  ^^  adopts,  yields  a  more  obvious  meaning, 
especially  in  the  second  sentence  where  the  word 
is  used. 

A  letter  which  Gregory  wrote  in  March,  596, 
to  Candidus,  bishop  of  Orvieto,  is  one  of  the  in- 
stances where  he  speaks  expressly  of  the  great 
care  to  be  exercised  in  the  admission  to  priestly 
ordination.^® 

"  Epp.  v,  57a,  can.  v;  Epp.  v,  62;  Johan.  Diac.  Vita  Greg. 
II,  5;  III,  5. 

"  Hefele,  Concgesch.  iix,  58.  See  Du  Cange,  s.  vv.  Pastus, 
Pastellus,   Pastillaticum. 

^Epp.  VI,  27;  Jaffg,  1407. 


156  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

II.     Gkegoey  the  Great  and  France 

At  the  time  of  Gregory's  accession,  as  well 
as  in  the  days  of  its  conquest  by  the  Romans, 
Gaul  was  divided  into  three  parts.  They  were 
the  three  kingdoms  of  Austrasia,  ISTeustria  and 
Burgundy.  Guntram  who  had  been  king  of 
Burgundy  since  561,  was  to  reign  only  three 
years  longer.  At  his  death,  his  dominions  passed 
under  the  control  of  Childebert  II,  king  of  Aus- 
trasia from  575  a.  d.  After  a  reign  of  only 
3  years  in  Burgundy,  Childebert  followed  his 
predecessor,  Guntram,  to  the  grave  (596).  The 
succession  now  fell  to  two  children,  Theodebert  II 
in  Austrasia  (596-612)  and  Theodoric  II  in 
Burgundy  (596-613).  Queen  Brunehilde  assumed 
the  regency  for  her  two  grandsons,  but  had  to 
defend  her  position  against  that  all-powerful 
woman  of  ISTeustria,  Fredegundis,  until  the  latter's 
death  in  597.  In  the  kingdom  of  N'eustria,  no 
personal  change  of  ruler  took  place  during  Gre- 
gory's pontificate.  Clothaire  II,  who  occupied  the 
throne,  not  only  outlived  that  time,  but  was  king 
of  all  the  Franks  from  613  to  628.  This  brief 
mention  of  the  rulers  of  the  different  kingdoms  is 
required  because  Gregory  the  Great,  in  his  work 
of  ecclesiastical  reform,  tried  to  enlist  the  coopera- 
tion not  only  of  the  local  bishops,  but  also  of  the 
civil  power.     That  this  reform  was  necessary  may 


GREGORY   THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY       I57 

be  seen  from  the  foregoing  pages.  The  idea 
therein  expressed  will  be  briefly  recalled  by  the 
following  extract  from  F.  H.  Dudden.^°  Speak- 
ing of  France  he  says :  "  The  Church  was  de- 
generate and  full  of  abuses.  The  clergy  were 
mostly  of  servile  origin  (for  it  was  forbidden  to 
ordain  a  freeman  without  the  king's  permission)  ^^ 
and  they  had  the  peculiar  vices  of  slaves — greed, 
sensuality,  undue  subserviency  to  the  temporal 
rulers.  All  intellectual  movement  was  at  a  stand- 
still. Simony  was  rife,  bishoprics  were  given 
away  by  court  favor,  and  laymen  were  ordained 
to  wealthy  sees.  The  bishops  had  become  landed 
lords  and  courtiers.  They  meddled  in  politics, 
and  are  found  mixed  up  in  all  manner  of  dis- 
creditable intrigues,  and  even  bloodshed.  They 
oppressed  their  parochial  clergy,  who,  in  return, 
resisted  their  authority  to  the  utmost  and  formed 
conspiracies  against  them.  Owing  principally  to 
the  jealousies  and  dissensions  of  the  rival  king- 
doms, the  power  of  the  metropolitans  had  declined. 
Hence  the  bishops  had,  to  a  great  extent,  emanci- 
pated themselves  from  all  control,  and  rarely  met 
in  synod.  In  the  sixth  century,  only  fifty-four 
councils  were  held  in  Gaul ;  in  the  seventh,  only 
twenty.  The  bishops  allied  themselves  closely 
with  the  kings,  of  whom  they  became  the  coun- 
sellors and  advisers,  and  whom,  in  return  for  cer- 

^  Gregory  the  Great,  11,  53-54. 
^  Council  of  Origans,  511,  c.  4. 


158  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

tain  concessions,  they  permitted  to  encroach  upon 
the  privileges  of  the  Church.  Thus  in  all  that 
concerned  its  relation  to  the  State,  the  Church  had 
lost  independence." 

The  author  of  the  Life  of  St.  Eligius  tells 
us,  that  "  it  was  principally  from  the  times 
of  the  most  unfortunate  Queen  Brunehilde  to 
the  period  of  King  Dagobert  that  this  vice 
(simony)  so  opposed  to  the  Catholic  faith  was 
indulged  in."  ^"  Columbanus,  in  a  letter  ad- 
dressed to  Gregory  the  Great  between  the  years 
595  and  600,  speaks  of  the  large  number  of 
simoniacal  persons  in  Gaul.  At  the  same  time, 
he  asks  the  pontifP  for  information  as  to  whether 
or  not  he  should  remain  in  communion  with  simo- 
niacal bishops. ^^  It  certainly  was  a  rather  alarm- 
ing symptom  of  the  absence  of  religious  spirit, 
which  manifested  itself  in  Paris  at  the  death  of 
Ragnimodus,  the  bishop  of  the  city,  about  592. 
His  successor  was  neither  an  ecclesiastic  nor  a 
Frank,  but  a  Syrian  merchant,  whose  sole  recom- 
mendation was  his  lavish  distribution  of  presents.^^ 

With  remarkable  energy  and  tact,  Gregory  un- 
dertook the  reform  of  such  crying  abuses.  On 
August  12,   595,  he  named  Bishop  Vergilius  of 

'^  Vita  Eligii.  Lib.  ii,  c  1. 

"MGH.  Epp.  Mer.  et  Kar.  Aevi,  Tom.  I,  158-59,  ed. 
Gundlach. 

"Greg,  of  Tours,  Hist.  Franc,  x,  26. 


GREGORY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY        159 

Aries  his  vicar  in  the  dominions  of  Childebert  II 
(Austrasia,  Bnrgundy,  and  Aquitaine),  granted 
him  the  use  of  the  pallium,  and  wrote  to  him  as 
follows : 

"  I  have  been  informed  that  in  parts  of  Gaul  and 
Germany  -^  no  one  is  raised  to  sacred  orders  without 
the  bestowal  of  gifts.  If  this  be  the  case,  I  sa}^ 
with  grief,  nay  with  tears  in  my  eyes,  that  after  the 
interior  decay  of  the  priestly  order  has  taken  place, 
its  exterior  ruin  cannot  be  delayed  much  longer. 
We  know  from  the  Gospel  how  Our  Lord  himself 
acted :  He  Avent  into  the  temple  and  overthrew  the 
chairs  of  them  that  sold  doves.  To  sell  doves  is  to 
derive  temporal  advantage  from  the  Holy  Spirit, 
consubstantial  to  the  divinity,  whom  God  Almighty 
confers  upon  men  by  the  imposition  of  hands.  As 
I  have  already  stated,  the  results  of  the  simoniacal 
evil  are  apparent :  for  the  chairs  of  them  that  pre- 
sumed to  sell  doves  in  the  temple  of  God,  were  over- 
thrown by  the  divine  judgment.  This  corruption 
is  transmitted  in  increasing  proportion  to  the  in- 
feriors. For  he  who  is  raised  to  sacred  honors  for  a 
temporal  gift,  is,  as  it  were,  corrupted  at  the  very  root 
through  such  preferment,  and  is  quite  ready  to  sell  to 
others  what  he  himself  has  bought.  Where  is  then, 
the  observance  of  the  Scriptural  saying :  '  Freely  have 
you  received,  freely  give  '  ?     As  the  simoniacal  heresy 

'=  The  realm  of  Childebert  II  included  an  important  part 
of  Southwestern  Germany  and  Bavaria.  There  is  no 
question  here  of  the  other  sections  of  Germany, 


160  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

was  the  first  one  to  arise  against  the  Church,  is  it  so 
hard  to  see,  is  it  so  difficult  to  realize  that  he  who 
ordains  a  person  for  a  fee,  by  thus  promoting  him, 
transforms  him  into  a  heretic  "  ?  ^® 

xinother  abuse,  which  the  earnest  pontiff  in- 
veighs against  in  this  same  letter,  is  the  nomina- 
tion of  laymen  to  bishoprics,  an  evil  which,  at 
least  partly,  was  a  consequence  of  simony.  On 
the  same  day  (Aug.  12,  595),  he  also  wrote  to  all 
the  bishops  of  the  kingdom  of  Childebert,  advised 
them  of  the  nomination  of  Vergilius  as  his  repre- 
sentative, and  mentioned,  in  particular,  his  in- 
structions to  the  latter  respecting  the  extirpation 
of  the  simoniacal  evil.^'''  He  prescribed  that  the 
letter  to  the  bishop  of  Aries  should  be  read  pub- 
licly in  their  presence.  These  two  communica- 
tions were  forwarded  a  few  days  later  to  Gaul, 
together  with  a  third  letter  to  Childebert,  written 
on  the  15th  of  August.  Gregory  requested  the 
king  to  put  an  end  to  simony  in  his  dominions  for 
the  honor  of  the  Church,  the  welfare  of  his  soul, 
and  on  account  of  the  unworthiness  of  a  candidate 
who  obtains  through  money  a  dignity  due  only 
to  merit. "^ 

When,    after   Childebert's   death,   the   adminis- 

'^  Reg.  Epp.  v,  58;  JaflFe,  1374. — Lib.  Diurnus,  form,  46, 
ed.  Rozifere. 

''Reg.  Epp.  v,  59;  JafTg,  1375. 

''^Reg.  Epp.  v,  60;  Jaffg,  1376.     See  Lib.  Diurn.  form.  49. 


GREGORY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIIMONY        161 

tration  of  his  kingdom  had  passed  into  the  hands 
of  his  mother,  Queen  Brunehilde,  Gregory  tried 
to  interest  her  in  the  work  of  reform.  In  Septem- 
ber, 597,  he  urged  upon  her  the  necessity  of  ex- 
chiding  the  influence  of  temporal  interests  from 
the  nomination  to  ecclesiastical  offices.  I^ot  only 
the  payment  of  money,  but  the  protection  of  power- 
ful and  distinguished  relations  ought  to  be  left 
out  of  consideration  in  naming  to  sacred  dignities. 
To  the  reasons  he  had  already  adduced  against 
the  sale  of  ecclesiastical  preferment,  Gregory  adds 
a  traditional  and  a  political  one.  He  reminds 
the  queen  of  the  condemnation  of  the  sin  by  the 
Fathers  of  the  Church  and  calls  her  attention  to 
the  source  of  weakness,  which  such  practices  be- 
come for  her  kingdom.-" 

In  July,  599,  Gregory  returned  to  the  task. 
A  somewhat  lengthy  circular  was  addressed  to  the 
bishops,  Syagrius  of  Autun,  Etherius  of  Lyons, 
Vergilius  of  Aries  and  Desiderius  of  Vienne,  who 
were  either  at  the  head  of  metropolitan  districts 
or  wielded  considerable  influence  at  court.  After 
expressing  his  grief  at  the  practice  of  simony  in 
Gaul,  he  continues : 

"  He  who  endeavors  to  purchase  the  episcopal 
office  with  money,  neglecting  the  office  for  the  appear- 
ance, desires,  in  his  folly  to  be  a  bishop  not  in  reality, 

^  Reg.  Epp.  VIII,  4;   Jaffe,  Reg.   1491. 
11 


162  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

but  in  name  only.  If  such  dealings  are  permitted, 
what  will  be  the  result  other  than  that  there  will  be 
no  investigation  into  the  candidate's  conduct,  no 
concern  felt  about  his  moral  character,  no  examina- 
tion made  of  his  past  life.  Only  he  who  is  able  to  pay 
for  the  dignity  will  be  considered  worthy  of  it.  But 
if  the  matter  be  weighed  in  the  true  balance,  the  one 
who  presses  forward  to  seize  upon  a  post  of  useful- 
ness for  the  iniquitous  satisfaction  of  his  vain 
glory,  is  the  less  worthy  of  the  honor  from  the  fact 
that  he  seeks  it.  As  he,  who  declines  wlien  re- 
quested and  flees  when  sought  out,  should  not  be 
admitted  to  the  service  of  the  altar,  so  the  one  who 
uses  improper  solicitations  and  importunities  for  his 
own  advancement,  ought  imdoubtedly  to  be  rejected. 
For  does  not  the  candidate  for  such  an  office  lower 
himself  in  thus  seeking  to  rise,  and  sink  deeply 
interiorly,  while  exteriorly  he  is  raised  to  a  higher 
place?  Integrity,  then,  dear  fellow-bishops,  ought 
to  prevail  in  episcopal  consecration;  venality  and  all 
undue  influence  shoidd  be  excluded  from  the  elec- 
tion, so  that  the  promotion  of  the  bishop-elect  may 
be  attributed  to  the  judgment  of  God  and  not  to  the 
suffrage  of  bought  electors." 

The  pope  again  compares  simoniacal  persons  to 
the  vendors  in  the  temple.  Some  of  the  former 
had  excused  their  culpable  conduct  on  the  plea 
that  the  proceeds  of  the  transactions  were  expended 
on  deserving  objects — the  poor,  the  construction 
of  hospitals  and  monasteries.  Accordingly  he 
continues : 


GREGORY   THE   GREAT    AND    SIMONY        163 

''  Very  frequently  the  enemy  of  souls,  seeing  that 
he  cannot  triumph  in  what  is  plainly  wrong,  cleverly 
endeavors  to  insinuate  himself  under  the  guise  of 
piety  and  pleads  that  perhaps  something  ought  to 
be  accepted  from  persons  of  means  to  be  distributed 
among  their  poverty-stricken  fellow-beings.  His 
purpose  is  to  infuse,  in  this  fashion,  the  deadly  poison 
(of  simony)  imder  the  veil  of  almsdeeds.  For  the 
hunter  would  not  decoy  the  wild  animal,  nor  the 
fowler  the  bird,  nor  again  the  fisherman  the  fish, 
if  the  two  former  laid  their  snares  in  the  open,  or 
if  the  last-mentioned  did  not  conceal  the  hook  under 
the  bait.  The  astuteness  of  the  enemy  must  be 
feared  and  diligently  guarded  against,  lest  the  Evil 
One  succeed  in  inflicting  a  more  severe  wound  with 
a  hidden  arrow  on  those  who  are  proof  against  open 
temptation.  The  distribution  to  the  poor  of  unlaw- 
fully acquired  goods  cannot  be  considered  an  alms- 
deed;  for  the  unjust  acceptance  of  property  with 
the  intention  of  expending  it  in  good  works  is  more 
injurious  than  beneficial  to  the  recipient.  Only  that 
charity  is  acceptable  in  the  eyes  of  Our  Kedeemer, 
which  distributes,  not  the  produce  of  injustice  and 
iniquity,  but  righteously  acquired  and  lawfully 
o^\Tied  property.  It  is  certain  that  if  the  money  goes 
to  the  foundation  of  monasteries,  hospitals  or  similar 
institutions,  this  is  of  no  profit  to  the  donor.  The 
perverse  purchaser,  who  succeeds  to  an  ecclesiastical 
office  and  appoints  others  like  himself  to  sacred 
positions  for  the  payment  of  money,  works  more 
harm  by  these  worthless  ordinations  than  can  be 
repaired   by    the    one    who    received   the   ordination 


164  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

money  from  him.  To  prevent  us  from  striving  after 
damnable  acquisitions  under  the  pretext  of  alms- 
deeds,  the  Sacred  Scriptures  have  issued  the  follow- 
ing clear  prohibition :  '  The  sacrifices  of  the  wicked 
are  abominable;  because  the}^  are  offered  of  wicked- 
ness' (Prov.  XXI,  27).  For  whenever  the  oblation 
offered  up  to  God  in  sacrifice  is  the  produce  of  a 
crime,  it  does  not  placate,  but  increases  the  wrath 
of  the  Almighty.  Hence  it  is  written  also :  '  Honor 
the  Lord  with  the  honest  fruit  of  thy  laboi '  (Prov. 
Ill,  9).  Unjust  reception  for  charitable  distribution 
is  then  undoubtedly  not  to  the  honor  of  God. 
Wherefore  Solomon  also  says :  '  He  that  offereth 
sacrifice  of  the  goods  of  the  jjoor,  is  as  one  that 
sacrificeth  the  son  in  the  presence  of  his  father ' 
(Ecclesiasticus,  xxxiv,,  24).  Let  us  reflect  how  deep 
is  the  grief  of  that  father  whose  son  is  sacrificed  before 
his  eyes,  and  we  will  easily  understand  the  intensity 
of  God's  wrath  at  the  sight  of  a  sacrifice  offered  to 
Him  of  rapine.  The  commission  of  the  sin  of 
'  simoniacal  heresy '  under  the  pretext  of  charity 
must,  therefore,  dearest  brother-bishops,  be  abso- 
lutely avoided.  It  is  one  thing  to  give  alms  because 
of  our  sins  and  another  to  commit  sin  in  order  to 
give  alms."  ^° 

Along  with  simony,  other  abuses  were  men- 
tioned in  the  circular,  chiefly  the  promotion  of 
laymen  to   the  episcopate.     A   synod   was  to   be 

^"Epp.   IX,  218;    Jaffe,  Reg.   1747. 


GREGORY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY        165 

convoked  at  which  a  solemn  condemnation  of  these 
evils  would  be  issued.  The  deliberations  were  to 
be  held  under  the  supervision  of  the  papal  legate 
Cyriacus  with  Aregius,  bishop  of  Gap,  and  a  re- 
port of  the  proceedings  was  to  be  forwarded  to 
Rome  by  the  same  Aregius  and  by  Syagrius, 
bishop  of  Autuu."'^  The  former's  qualities  had 
become  known  to  the  pope  while  he  was  on  a  visit 
to  Rome;  the  latter  exercised  considerable  in- 
fluence at  the  royal  court  and  could  be  of  great 
service  in  bringing  about  the  convocation  of  a 
council.^^  The  sympathy  of  the  civil  rulers  and 
their  cooperation  in  the  work  which  Gregory  was 
trying  to  carry  out,  was  an  important,  an  almost 
indispensable  element  of  success.  The  councils 
were  convoked  by  the  kings,  or  assembled  only 
with  their  approval  and  assistance.  Amid  the 
insecure  and  barbarous  conditions  of  the  period, 
the  kings  alone  were  powerful  enough  to  deter- 
mine effectively  a  place  of  meeting,  and  to  make 
it  accessible  to  the  prelates  of  the  most  distant 
sees.^^  Gregory  applied  directly  to  the  royal 
authority  for  support  in  his  efforts.  He  entered 
a  strong  plea  with  Queen  Brunehilde  in  favor  of 

'^Epp.  IX,  218  and  ix,  219. 

"'Epp.  IX,  222;  JafTe,  1751;  also  Epp.  IX,  213  and  ix, 
215.     See  also  AA.  «.<?.  May  I  Vita  Arigii,   110-111. 

'^  See  on  this  Vaes,  La  Papaute  et  I'Eglise  Franque  in 
Rev.  d'hist.  eccl.    (1905),  vi,  770  and  771. 


166  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

the  suppression  of  abuses  in  the  church  of  Gaul. 
Simony,  he  contended,  not  only  meant  the  ruin 
of  ecclesiastical  dignity  and  discipline,  it  was  also 
a  danger  to  the  state. ^^  He  likewise  addressed  a 
letter  on  the  same  topic  to  her  two  grandsons, 
Theodoric  and  Theodebert.  To  them  also  he 
spoke  of  the  injurious  consequences  which  the 
toleration  of  simony  would  have  for  their 
dominions.^^ 

Gregory  was  justified  in  expecting  some  appre- 
ciable results  from  these  strenuous  exertions. 
His  expectations,  however,  were  disappointed. 
His  legate  Cyriacus  died  shortly  after  his  arrival 
in  Gaul.  Syagrius  was  also  carried  off  by  an 
untimely  death.  Other  bishops  Avere  not  over- 
anxious to  censure  their  own  actions  or  practices. 
The  death  of  Fredegundis  (597)  had  not  brought 
about  a  lasting  peace  among  the  Merovingian 
princes.  Strife  between  the  different  kingdoms 
and  within  the  same  kingdom  was  not  likely  to 
direct  the  attention  of  temporal  princes  to  re- 
ligious affairs.  The  fear  of  losing  the  exercise 
of  certain  privileges  and  of  strengthening  the 
poAver  of  the  bishops  by  uniting  them,  were  other 
probable  causes  which  prevented  action  by  the 
royal  power.^^     It  is  certain  that  little  effort  was 

^*Epp.  IX,  213;  Jaffe,  1743. 
"'Epp.  IX,  215;   Jaffe,  1744. 
™  See  Vaes,  I.  c.  772,  773. 


GREGORY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY        167 

made  to  suppress  the  corruption  against  which 
Gregory  had  undertaken  such  a  vigorous  campaign. 

But  Gregory  was  not  the  man  to  let  matters 
rest  there.  In  601  he  inaugurated  a  new  crusade 
against  corruption  in  the  Frankish  church.  He 
again  appealed  for  support  to  both  the  temporal 
and  the  ecclesiastical  authorities.  The  necessity  of 
holding  a  council  for  the  condemnation  of  simony 
was  again  urged  upon  them,  and  at  the  same  time 
the  missionaries,  whom  the  pontiff  sent  to  Au- 
gustine in  England,  were  recommended  to  their 
kindness.  Vergilius  of  Aries  was  congratulated 
upon  his  personal  freedom  from  simony,  but  his 
failure  to  repress  it  in  others  did  not  deserve 
commendation.'*^"  Etherius  of  Lyons  did  not 
exhibit  more  zeal  in  suppressing  the  evil  and  was 
requested  to  suit  his  actions  to  his  words.  The 
influence  of  money,  blandishments  and  favor 
ought  alike  to  be  excluded  from  ordinations. 
The  old  evil,^'^  simony  must  be  eradicated.^^ 
Aregius  of  Gap  deserved  recognition  for  the  work 
he  had  accomplished.  The  pope  well  recalls  the 
zeal  he  displayed  against  simony  in  599,  and 
cherishes  the  hope  that  he  will  continue  his  efforts 
in  the  right  direction. 

Though  unable  to  eulogize  the  Frankish  kings 

^''Epp.  XI,  38;  Jaffe,  1828. 
'* "  Malum  vetustatis." 
'^Epp.    XI,    40;    Jaff^,    1830. 


1(58  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

for  ecclesiastical  reforms  which  they  had  never 
undertaken,  Gregory  dwelt  with  pleasure  and  true 
diplomatic  skill  upon  the  favorable  dispositions 
which  they  had  manifested  in  599.  He  again 
addressed  letters  to  King  Theodoric,'**'  his  brother 
Theodebert,^^  and  Queen  Brunehilde,^^  and 
pleaded  earnestly  for  the  suppression  of  that 
"  heresy,"  which  was  the  first  to  make  its  appear- 
ance in  the  Church.  As  he  had  done  two  years 
previously,  so  Gregory  now  intended  to  send  a  leg- 
ate to  Gaul  to  superintend  the  work  of  reform  and 
take  vigorous  action  against  certain  far  from  ex- 
emplary bishops.  A  royal  request  to  the  pope  to 
name  such  a  representative  would  evidently  secure 
more  influence  and  power  to  the  latter  as  he  would 
then  appear  to  be  vested,  in  a  way,  with  both 
royal  and  ecclesiastical  authority.  The  kings 
would  be  bound  to  second  his  efforts,  and  the 
bishops  could  hardly  refuse  to  yield  to  his  dictates 
and  influence.  Hence  Gregory  suggested  to  Queen 
Brunehilde  to  forward  a  written  petition  to  him 
for  a  legate.'*^  He  also  wrote  to  Clothaire  II, 
king  of  ISTeustria,  to  whom  he  had  not  appealed 
in  599.  He  desired  that  Clothaire,  like  his 
fellow-rulers,   should  see  that   a  council  be  held 

^'Epp.  XI,   47;    Jaff6,    1838. 

"J5?pp.  XI,  50;   Jaffe,   1847. 

"^Epp.  XI,  49;    Jaffe,   1840. 

«^pp.  XI,  46;    Jaffe,   1837. 


GREGORY   THE    GREAT    AND    SI]MONY        169 

for  the  extirpatiou  of  siniouy,  which  the  Apostles 
had  already  condemned,^^  The  temporal  rulers 
to  whom  Gregory  had  addressed  letters  thus  repre- 
sented the  three  kingdoms  of  Austrasia,  Burgundy 
and  !N^eustria.  It  does  not  appear  from  the  pon- 
tiff's instructions,  whether  a  general  council  repre- 
sentative of  these  three  kingdoms  was  to  be 
convoked,  or  whether  three  separate  synods  were 
to  be  convened.  It  is  probable  enough  that  the 
pope  considered  this  point  secondary  and  would 
have  been  satisfied  with  either  procedure.  In  all 
probability  he  purposely  left  the  decision  of  the 
question  to  the  judgment  of  the  interested  parties. 
Being  on  the  spot,  they  were  in  a  better  position 
to  have  an  accurate  knowledge  of  the  circum- 
stances and  of  the  possibility  of  cooperation  be- 
tween the  ruling  princes.  It  was  perhaps  in  re- 
sponse to  Gregory's  energetic  demands  that  the 
council  of  Chalon-sur-Saone  met  in  602.  We  are 
nowhere  informed,  however,  that  it  made  an 
attempt  to  remedy  the  abuses  of  which  Gregory 
had  so  frequently  complained. ^^  We  have  still 
less  information  respecting  the  council  of  Sens 
held  between  594-614.^^     As  to  that  of  Auxerre, 

**  Epp.  XI,  51;  Jaire,  1842.  On  Gregory  and  simony  in 
Gaul  and  other  countries,  see  also  Joh.  Diac.  Vita  Greg. 
Ill,  1  seqq.,  where  John  the  Deacon  speaks  at  some  length 
of  the  pope's  activity  in  this  line. 

^'Maassen,  Concilia,  178.  "Maassen,  Concilia,  184. 


170  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

held  approximately  between  573  and  603,  it  very 
probably  belongs  to  an  earlier  date  than  601-603 
and  did  not  issue  any  condemnation  of  simony.^'^ 
It  must  be  acknowledged  that  Gregory's  prudent, 
judicious,  and  persevering  exertions  to  effect  an 
amelioration  in  ecclesiastical  conditions  in  France 
ended  in  failure,  as  far  as  immediate  results  are 
concerned.  That  he  never  gave  up  the  struggle 
is  proved  by  the  fact  that  in  November,  602,  he 
issued  three  charters,  which  reveal  his  anxiety  to 
exclude  simony  from  the  election  of  abbots  and 
abbesses.^^  But  prohibitions  alone,  which  were 
often  unheeded,  could  be  of  little  avail.  The 
great  pope,  realizing  the  strength  of  the  civil  power 
and  the  extension  of  its  influence  even  to  ecclesi- 
astical affairs,  had  made  the  necessary  concessions 
to  it;  he  had  respected  its  right  of  episcopal 
confirmation.  He  had  more  than  acknowledged 
the  good  will  manifested  by  royal  personages. 
He  had  granted  privileges  to  the  bishops  to  spur 
on  their  zeal.  His  arguments  against  barter  in 
spiritual  things  were  all  calculated  to  make  an 
impression  upon  his  contemporaries.  In  spite  of 
all  these  labors,  he  was  to  die  (604)  without 
witnessing  any  change  for  the  better  in  Frankish 
ecclesiastical  conditions.  His  efforts  were  not 
fruitless,  however ;  his  admonitions  and  pleadings 

"Maassen,  ibid.   178-84. 

^Epp.  Xlii,   11;   XIII,   12;   XIII,   13. 


GREGORY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY        I7I 

could  not  be  easily  forgotten.  lie  had  recalled 
the  bishops  to  a  sense  of  their  duty.  Mindful  of 
his  injunctions,  they  assembled  ten  years  later 
(614)  in  general  council  at  Paris.  Here  im- 
portant decrees  were  promulgated  and  the  first 
specific  one  among  them  was  a  prohibition  of 
simony."*^ 

The  condition  of  ecclesiastical  affairs  in  Spain 
contrasts  favorably  with  that  in  France.  The 
country  being  comparatively  tranquil,  there  was 
much  less  religious  disorder.  During  the  pon- 
tificate of  Gregory  the  Great  the  second  council 
of  Barcelona  (l^ovember  1,  599),  repeating  the 
decrees  of  previous  synods,  forbade  the  acceptance 
of  money  for  blessed  chrism  and  ordinations. 
Neither  the  bishop  nor  any  one  of  his  clergy  was 
to  demand  any  remuneration  for  the  advancement 
of  candidates  to  the  subdiaconate  or  priesthood. 
Unduly  rapid  promotion  in  clerical  orders  was  also 
condemned.  ^°  From  the  fact  that  Gregory,  in 
letters  to  persons  in  France,  earnestly  advocated 
the  abolition  of  these  abuses,  and  had  sent  the 
same  person,  Cyriacus,  as  papal  legate  both  to 
Spain  ^^  and  to  the  Merovingian  kingdoms,  Baro- 
nius  ^-  is  strongly  inclined  to  conclude  that  the 

"Maassen,  Concilia,  185-92;  Hefele,  iii,  67-70. 

'"Mansi,  x,  481-84;   Hefele,  iii,  59-60;   Gams,  Kircheng. 
V.  Span.   II,  II,  26-27. 

"  Greg.  Epp.  ix,  230.  ^"  Ad  ann.  599,  n.  23. 


172  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

condemnations  under  consideration  were  the  result 
of  Gregory's  activity.  Gams,^^  on  the  contrary, 
thinks  that  the  eighteenth  canon  of  the  third  synod 
of  Toledo,  which  prescribed  the  holding  of  annual 
synods,  caused  the  council  of  Barcelona  to  meet, 
l^either  opinion  rests  on  grounds  sufficient  to  give 
us  certainty  on  the  question.  It  is  possible  that 
both  Gregory's  exhortations  and  the  prescriptions 
of  the  synod  of  Toledo  had  a  bearing  on  the  event. 


Op.  cit.   II,   II,  28. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

GREGORY    THE    GREAT    AND    SIMONY    IN    THE 
EASTERN  EMPIRE 

I.  Asia,  Egypt  and  Eastern  Europe: — Ecclesiastical 
policy  of  the  Eastern  emperors  —  Corruption  in  the  em- 
pire —  Letters  of  Gregory  to  Anastasius  of  Antioch  and 
Isacius  of  Jerusalem  —  The  church  of  Alexandria  —  Un- 
known result  of  Gregory's  activity  —  Eastern  Europe  — 
Trial  of  Anastasius  of  Corinth  —  Instructions  to  his  suc- 
cessor and  to  the  bishops  of  Epirus  —  The  church  of 
Salona;  Gregory's  instructions  to  his  representative 
Antoninus  —  Honoratus  elected  bishop  of  Salona  — 
Honoratus  opposed  by  Maximus  —  The  latter's  conse- 
cration —  Conflict  between  Gregory  and  Maximus  — 
INIaximus  makes  his  submission.  II.  Northwestern 
Africa: — Ecclesiastical  division  of  the  country  —  The 
primatial  dignity  —  Donatism  —  Catholics  allow  Do- 
natists  to  rebaptize  them  for  a  bribe  —  Catholic 
bishops  yield  to  bribery  —  Gregory  appeals  to  the  civil 
government  for  help  against  the  Donatists  —  He  vainly 
tries  to  introduce  a  new  primatial  organization  —  The 
cases  of  Bishops  Argentius,  Maximianus  and  Paulinus 
to  be  investigated  at  synods  —  Letters  to  Bishops  Coluni- 
bus  and  Adeodatus  —  Council  of  Carthage  —  Doubtful 
Numidian  council  —  Gregory's  success  in  Africa  only 
partial  —  His  influence  on  Canon  Law. 

I.     Asia,  Egypt  and  Easteen  Eueope 

Justinian  the  Great  had  made  a  vigorous  attempt 
to  exclude  from  the  sanctuary  the  exchange  of 
spiritual    for    temporal    goods.     His    enactments 

173 


174  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

were  unmistakable  on  this  point;  but  for  various 
reasons  the  celebrated  lawgiver  was  far  from 
successful  in  suppressing  simony.  The  policy  of 
the  Eastern  emperors  was  too  arbitrary;  they  con- 
demned in  others  what  they  sometimes  practised 
themselves.  They  too  easily  disregarded  the  ex- 
isting laws  when  it  suited  their  inclination, 
advantage  or  whims,  and  the  disregard  of  the 
anti-simoniacal  legislation  was  frequently  ad- 
vantageous to  the  civil  authority.  The  danger 
would  have  been  offset  by  a  clergy  imbued  with 
a  thoroughly  ecclesiastical  and  soundly  independ- 
ent spirit.  But  it  is  universally  known  that  the 
Eastern  clergy  were  ready  to  yield  to  temporal 
autocrats  and  not  disinclined  to  raise  themselves, 
at  times  by  questionable  means,  to  high  position. 
Thus  the  laws  of  Justinian  expressed  a  beautiful 
theory  and  ideal,  but  were  hardly  more  than  a 
dead  letter  in  practical  life.  Gregory  the  Great 
had  to  wage  a  fierce  struggle  against  cupidity  in 
the  West;  the  Eastern  empire,  too,  required  just 
as  much  of  his  attention  in  this  respect.  As  seen 
above,  no  episcopal  candidate  was,  according  to 
Gregory's  information,  free  from  simony  in  Gaul ; 
he  tells  us  himself  that  an  identical  state  of  affairs 
existed  in  the  East.^  It  is  true  that  several 
passages  of  Gregory's  letters,  which  speak  of  the 
traffic  in  ecclesiastical  offices  prevalent  in  different 

^Epp.  IX,  135;  Jaffe,  1661;  Epp.  XI,  28;  Jaffg,  1818. 


GREGORY   THE   GREAT   AND   SIMONY         I75 

countries,  seem  to  be  a  uniform  formula  used  in- 
discriminately for  every  land.  They  not  only 
express  the  same  meaning;  they  are  couched  in 
the  very  same  terms.  It  may,  therefore,  be  con- 
tended that  they  do  not  depict  a  real  historical 
situation.  The  information  contained  in  these  pas- 
sages, it  must  be  conceded,  admits  of  a  wider  or 
narrower  interpretation  according  to  the  require- 
ments of  the  case ;  but  that  it  deserves  no  credence 
whatever,  cannot  be  maintained.  As  far  as  the 
Eastern  empire  is  concerned,  corruption  undoubt- 
edly prevailed  to  a  considerable  extent ;  and  it  was 
Gregory  that  took  the  work  of  reform  in  hand. 
In  April,  599,  he  wrote  to  Anastasius  Sinaita,  the 
newly  consecrated  bishop  of  Antioch,  that,  if 
reports  concerning  the  existence  of  the  evil  were 
true,  the  elimination  of  the  simoniacal  heresy 
from  the  churches  subject  to  him  should  be  his 
first  offering  to  God  Almighty.  "  For  not  to 
mention  anything  else,  what  will  be  the  conduct, 
in  sacred  orders,  of  men  who  are  promoted,  not 
for  merit,  but  for  remuneration  "  ?  ^'  An  identi- 
cal appeal  was  addressed  not  quite  two  years  later 
to  Isacius,  bishop  of  Jerusalem.  As  proofs  of  the 
aversion  of  Our  Lord  and  the  Apostles  for  the 
evil,  the  conduct  of  Jesus  Christ  towards  the 
vendors  in  the  Temple  and  the  condemnation  of 
Simon  Magus  by  Peter,  were  cited.^ 

-Epp.    IX,    135;    Jaff^,    1661. 
^Epp.  XI,   28;    Jaffe,    1818. 


176  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

As  Eulogius,  a  warm  personal  friend  of  Gregory 
and  a  zealous  defender  of  the  orthodox  faith, 
was  at  the  head  of  the  church  of  Alexandria, 
Gregory  fondly  supposed  that  that  diocese  was 
not  contaminated  by  the  all-pervading  corruption. 
He  was  mistaken.  To  his  great  surprise  he  was 
informed  in  603  by  a  young  man  who  had  studied 
medicine  at  Alexandria,  that  the  evil  was  rife  even 
there.  This  man  mentioned  the  sudden  ordina- 
tion to  the  diaconate  of  a  worthless  individual 
of  his  own  acquaintance.  He  asserted  that  the 
promotion,  according  to  the  practice  in  the  Alex- 
andrian church,  was  procured  by  a  distribution  of 
gifts.  "  And  who  is  there,"  Gregory  thereupon 
exclaimed  in  his  letter  to  Eulogius,  "  whose  ex- 
hortation and  correction  will  be  able  to  remedy 
this  state  of  things,  if  the  exalted  and  admirable 
doctrine  of  Eulogius  provided  no  remedy?  For 
the  salvation  of  your  soul,  the  increase  of  your 
reward,  and  in  order  that  your  works  may  be 
perfect  in  all  respects  in  the  sight  of  the  terrible 
Judge,  hasten  completely  to  extirpate  and  eradi- 
cate from  your  most  holy  see,  which  is  also  ours, 
that  first-born  of  all  heresies,  simony.  The  reason 
of  the  very  noticeable  absence  of  holiness  from 
ecclesiastical  ranks,  is  to  be  found  in  the  ordi- 
nation of  persons  not  for  their  conduct  and  deeds, 
but  for  reward.  If  merit  and  not  wealth  is 
sought  out,  unworthy  persons  will  not  appear  for 


GREGORY   THE    GREAT   AND   SIMONY         I77 

ordination.  As  to  yourself,  the  more  earnestly 
the  salvation  of  souls  is  sought  by  those  worthy 
candidates  whom  you  have  promoted  to  holy 
orders,  the  greater  will  be  your  reward."  ^ 

We  are  not  told  in  historical  records  whether 
Gregory's  admonitions  produced  any  results  either 
in  x\sia  or  Egypt.  The  Eastern  clergy  may  not 
have  considered  the  matter  referred  to  of  any 
great  importance,  as  would  appear  from  the  ante- 
cedent conduct  of  Eulogius,  bishop  of  Alexandria. 
The  latter  was  a  man  of  perfect  orthodoxy  and 
full  of  courage  in  the  defence  of  a  righteous  cause, 
and   still   simony  flourished   under   him. 

The  need  of  a  moral  reform  m  this  respect  ex- 
isted apparently  in  imperial  Europe  as  well  as  in 
the  countries  of  which  we  have  just  treated.  In 
a  congratulatory  letter  on  his  election  written  to 
John,^  bishop  of  Prima  Justiniana  in  Illyricum 
(now  Ochrida  in  Albania),  Gregory  reminded  him 
of  the  necessity  of  laying  aside  the  consideration 
of  reward,  interest  and  solicitation  in  the  pro- 
motion of  ecclesiastics,  lest  he  should  become  in- 
volved in  simoniacal  entanglements.^  In  595, 
Anastasius,  bishop  of  Corinth  and  metropolitan  of 
Achaia,  was  deposed  for  various  crimes.     During 

*Epp.  XIII,  44;   Jaffe,  1909;   AA.  S8.  Vita  Eulogii,  Sept. 
IV,  93-94. 

®  On  the  identity  of  this  John,  see  Epp.  V,  10,  note  1. 
^Epp.  V,  16;   Jaffe,  1164    (of  November,  594). 

12 


178  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

his  trial  it  developed  that  the  deacon  Paul  had 
maintained  an  interested  silence  and  refrained 
from  making  any  accusation  against  the  bishop 
in  consequence  of  having  been  promised  a  reward 
for  so  doing.  It  was  discovered,  moreover,  that 
the  clerics  Thomas  and  Euphemius  of  the  church 
of  Corinth  had  received  sacred  orders  from  Anas- 
tasius  in  exchange  for  discreet  silence  regarding 
his  unsavory  conduct.  Gregory  ordered  Thomas 
and  Euphemius  to  be  deprived  of  their  orders  and 
forbade  their  restoration  forever ;  he  allowed  them, 
however,  to  retain  their  original  position  and 
stipends.  After  the  promulgation  of  the  sentence 
against  Anastasius,  Paul  repented  of  his  conduct, 
and  his  repentance  was  deemed  sufficient  satis- 
faction. He  was  pardoned  and  retained  in  office 
together  with  the  lector  Clematius,  whose  offence 
does  not  appear  to  be  known.'''  Bishop  John,  who 
succeeded  Anastasius  in  the  see  of  Corinth,  was 
requested  to  remedy  the  evils  of  the  preceding  ad- 
ministration, received  a  most  urgent  appeal  against 
barter  in  spiritual  offices  and  was  informed  of 
the  Roman  conciliar  prohibitions  ^  against  the 
accej)tanee  of  fees  either  for  the  reception  of  the 
pallium  or  for  ordinations.  He  and  his  suffra- 
gans were  warned  that  the  canonical  penalties 
would  be  inflicted  against  them,  should  they  be 

'  Epp.  V,  57;   Jaffe,   1373    (of  July,  595). 
^  Synod  of  Rome,  held  in  July,  595. 


GREGORY   THE   GREAT   AND   SBIONY         I79 

guilty  of  any  simoniacal  transgressions  in  the 
future.^  About  the  same  time  (Sept.  595),  a 
similar  warning  v/as  addressed  to  the  bishops  of 
the  ancient  province  of  Epirus.^" 

Most  of  Gregory's  trouble  came  from  the  church 
of  Salona,  near  Spalatro,  the  metropolitan  see  of 
Western  Illyricum  or  Dalmatia.  At  the  very 
beginning  of  his  reign,  Gregory  had  to  intervene 
in  the  affairs  of  this  bishopric,  which  was  ruled 
by  the  worldly-minded  Natalis.  As  the  pleasure- 
loving  incumbent  found  church  revenues  a  very 
convenient  fund  for  defraying  the  expenses  of  his 
lavish  entertaining,  he  came  into  conflict  with  the 
archdeacon  Honoratus,  manager  of  the  church 
property  of  Salona,  who  forwarded  an  accusation 
against  him  to  Rome.  It  thus  happened  that 
vv^hen  j^atalis  died  in  593,  the  church  of  Salona 
was  divided  into  two  ecclesiastical  parties :  the 
supporters  of  the  bishop  who  in  spite  of  his  ex- 
travagances and  partly  because  of  them  had  been 
a  very  popular  man,  and  those  who  sided  with 
rionoratus.  Upon  learning  of  N^atalis'  death, 
Gregory  dispatched  (March,  593)  a  letter  with 
instructions  for  the  approaching  election  to  Anto- 
ninus, a  subdeacon  and  manager  of  the  Roman  pa- 
trimony in  Dalmatia.    "  Take  care  above  all  else," 

'Epp.  V,  62;  Jaffe,   1378    (August  15,  595);  Epp.  v,  63; 
Jaff6,  1379    (August,  595). 
">Epp.  VI,  7;  Jaffe,  1387. 


180  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

he  wrote,  "  that  no  bribery  whatever  play  any 
part  and  that  no  one's  patronage  be  exercised  in 
this  election.  For,  when  a  candidate  has  been 
elected  through  the  patronage  of  others,  he  feels 
obliged  to  act  reservedly  and  yield  to  their  desires ; 
and  this  means  neglect  of  the  affairs  of  the  church 
and  violation  of  ecclesiastical  ordinances."  ^^ 
Gregory  wished  to  see  an  independent  person 
named,  and  Antoninus  carried  out  his  instructions 
to  the  letter,  even  going  farther  perhaps,  than 
Gregory,  with  his  administrative  knowledge, 
desired.  The  pope's  representative  succeeded  in 
having  the  above-mentioned  Honoratus  elected. 
The  success  was  too  complete  to  be  lasting.  A 
strong  faction  opposed  Honoratus.  The  bishops 
of  Dalmatia  manifested  their  hostility  to  him,  for 
which  they  received  a  far  from  complimentary 
letter  from  Gregory.^-  The  pope  forbade,  under 
pain  of  excommunication,  the  consecration  of  any 
one  to  the  vacant  bishopric  without  his  permission. 
He  declared  his  readiness,  however,  to  confirm  any 
candidate  who  should  be  unanimously  elected. 
He  made  only  one  exception:  never  would  he  con- 
sent to  the  consecration  of  a  certain  Maximus,  of 
whom  he  had  received  a  very  sinister  account.  ^^ 
Intrigues  and  bribery  were  advancing  the  interests 
of   this    very    Maximus,    to    whom    Gregory    was 

"Spp.  Ill,  22;   Jaffe,  1226. 

^Epp.  IV,  16;  Jaffe,  1287.  " /6id. 


GREGORY   THE   GREAT   AND   SIMONY         181 

opposed.  The  unwelcome  candidate  secured, 
through  corruption,  if  we  are  to  believe  John  the 
Deacon,  ^^  the  support  of  the  emperor  Maurice  and 
produced  an  imperial  mandate  enjoining  his  con- 
secration. Gregory  was  informed  that  the  man- 
date was  either  a  forgery  or  had  been  procured  by 
theft  and  unhesitatingly  gave  credence  to  this  re- 
port; ^^  the  emperor  later  pronounced  against  the 
elevation  of  Maximus.^''  But  in  view  of  the  atti- 
tude of  practical  friendship  which  the  former 
assumed  and  maintained  towards  the  same  Maxi- 
mus,  it  is  very  difficult  to  admit  that  the  rescript 
had  been  issued  without  any  knowledge  of  either 
the  emperor  or  some  imperial  officials.  However 
this  may  be,  Maximus  was,  on  the  strength  of  this 
rescript,  consecrated  by  bishops  whom  a  previous 
distribution  of  rewards  had  rendered  ready  for 
the  performance  of  the  service,  and  with  the 
I'jhysical  help  of  men  who  had  likewise  been  the 
beneficiaries  of  the  new  bishop's  generosity. ^'^ 
Indeed,  so  violent  was  the  treatment  meted  out  to 
the  supporters  of  Honoratus  that,  according  to  the 
reports  which  reached  Rome,  the  pope's  repre- 
sentative, Antoninus,  had  to  take  to  flight  in  order 
to  preserve  his  life.^^     When  Gregory  heard  of 

"Vita  Greg,  iv,  9. 

^''Epp.   IV,   20;    JaflFe,    1292. 

"£?pp.  V,  6;  JaflFe,  1322. 

"  Job.  Diac.  Vita  Greg,  iv,  9 ;   Epp.  v,  6. 

^"Epp.  V,  G;  IV,  20;  Jaffe,  1292. 


182  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

Maximus'  intrusion,  he  forbade  him  and  the  con- 
secrating bishops  to  perform  any  episcopal  func- 
tion or  to  minister  at  the  altar,  till  official  infor- 
mation should  be  received  from  Constantinople 
regarding  the  genuineness  of  the  imperial  rescript. 
If  they  violated  these  prescriptions  of  the  pope, 
they  were  to  incur  excommunication.^^  Maximus, 
Vv-ithout  even  taking  cognizance  of  its  contents, 
had  this  letter  torn  to  pieces  and  continued  to  say 
Mass.^*^  This  naturally  embittered  the  conflict. 
Maximus  received  some  assistance  from  the  civil 
government  and  is  said  to  have  made  a  liberal  use 
of  the  church  funds  to  buy  supporters  among  the 
laity.^^  Gregory  on  his  part  insisted  upon  the 
trial  of  the  intruder  at  Rome,  on  several  charges, 
simony  being  one  of  them.^"  It  was  only  in  599 
that  the  long  conflict  came  to  an  end.  Some  of 
the  ecclesiastical  supporters  of  Maximus  appar- 
ently had  deserted  him ;  -^  Gregory  yielded  to  the 
importunities  of  the  exarch  Callinicus  and  per- 
mitted the  trial  to  be  held  at  Ravenna.^^  Maxi- 
mus was  to  appear  before  Marinian,  the  bishop  of 
the   latter   city.     In   case   the    defendant    should 

"J^pp.  IV,  20. 

'■'"Epp.  V,  6;  VI,  25;   Jafie,   1405. 
"^Epp.  V,  39;  Jaffe,  1352;  Joh.  Diac.  iv,  10. 
'"Epp.  V,  39;  VI,  3;  Jaffe,  1382;  vi,  25;  vi,  26;  Jaffe,  1406. 
'^Epp.  VII,   17;    Jaffe,   1463;    viii,   11;    Jaffg,   1498;   Joh. 
Diac.  IV,  11. 

-*Epp.  VIII,  24;   Jaffe,  1513;   IX,   155;  Jaff6,   1681. 


GREGORY   THE   GREAT   AND   SIMONY         183 

consider  Marinian  disqualified  because  of  preju- 
dice, Constantius  of  Milan  was  appointed  associate 
judge.  The  pope  promised  to  abide  by  whatever 
verdict  would  be  pronounced.^^  A  further  con- 
cession was  made  to  Maximus.  Instead  of  having 
to  undergo  a  regular  trial,  he  was  only  asked  to 
do  penance  for  celebrating  Mass  while  under 
sentence  of  excommunication,  and  to  swear  to  his 
innocence  of  the  other  charges.^®  Accordingly, 
in  July,  599,  the  metropolitan  of  Dalmatia  ap- 
peared at  Ravenna  and  lay  prostrate  for  three 
hours  in  the  streets  of  the  city  crying  out :  "I 
have  sinned  against  God  and  the  most  blessed 
pope  Gregory.-'  He  then  swore  before  the  tomb 
of  Apollinaris  and  in  presence  of  Marinianus 
Castorius,  a  chartulary  of  the  Roman  church,  and 
the  exarch  Callinicus  that  he  was  not  guilty  either 
of  simony  or  incontinency.-^  Having  thus  com- 
plied with  the  conditions  imposed  upon  him  he 
was  presented  Avith  a  letter  from  the  pope,  re- 
admitting him  to  communion  -^  and  shortly  after- 
wards he  received  the  pallium.-''  The  subsequent 
relations  between  pope  and  metropolitan,  as  can 
be  seen  from  Gregory's  correspondence,  were  of 
a  friendly  character.^" 

'^Epp.  IX,   149;   Jaffe,   1675;   ix,   155. 

"^Epp.   IX,   177;    Jaffe,    1704. 

""  Epp.  VIII,  36;   Joh.  Diac.  iv,  13. 

"^Epp.  IX,   17G;   .Jaffe,   1703;    ix,   178;    ,Jaff4,   1705. 

'^Epp.  IX,  234;   Jaffe,   1761. 

^'See  Epp.  X,  15;  Jaff€,  1784. 


184  A    HISTOKY    OF    SIMONY 

II.       NOETIIWESTEEN    AfRICA 

In  Western  Africa,  which  as  an  administrative 
entity,  extended  from  Lybia  to  the  Atlantic  Coast, 
Vandal  persecution  had  ceased  only  to  be  followed 
by  Byzantine  misrule  (535).  At  Gregory's 
accession,  the  country  was  divided  from  east 
to  west  into  six  provinces  as  follows:  Tripolis, 
Byzacium  or  Byzacene,  Proconsular  Africa, 
I^umidia,  Mauritania  Sitifensis  and  Mauritania 
Caesariensis.  The  most  important  bishopric  of 
these  provinces  was  that  of  Carthage,  whose  in- 
cumbent exercised  metropolitan  rights  over  all 
Northwestern  Africa,  besides  being  the  primate 
of  Proconsular  Africa.  These  privileges  were 
attached  to  the  see  of  Carthage.  In  the  five 
remaining  provinces,  the  ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion was  completely  different,  and  the  primatial 
dignity  does  not  seem  to  have  been  the  privilege 
of  any  fixed  see.  The  account  of  this  system  of 
primacies  as  given  by  Mann,  in  his  Lives  of  the 
Popes,^^  is  the  one  usually  received,  though  it  is 
not  capable  of  conclusive  demonstration.  It  is 
based  on  a  letter  of  Gregory  the  Great  ^^  and  reads 
thus :  "  Following  in  the  wake  of  St.  Leo  IX 
(1049-1055),  it  has  been  generally  agreed  among 
historians  that  it  was  length  or  duration  of  epis- 

""l,  75.  ''Epp.  I,  72;  Jaffe,  1141. 


GREGORY  THE    GREAT   AND   SIIMONY         185 

copal  consecration  which  settled  the  acquisition  of 
primatial  dignity.  In  his  note  to  this  letter  (of 
Gregory  the  Great),  however,  Ewald  not  unnatu- 
rally fails  to  see  how  number  of  years  of  ordina- 
tion can  be  got  out  of  the  words,  ex  ordine  loci. 
Doubtless  not  directly;  but,  though  automatic 
arrangements,  by  w^hich  ecclesiastical  preeminence 
in  a  province  might  be  settled  other  than  that  of 
seniority  may  be  imagined,  promotion  by  age  must 
be  acknowledged  to  be  in  every  way  the  most  likely. 
If  this  be  conceded,  Ewald's  difficulty  would  be 
solved,  and  the  explanation  of  Leo  IX  stand  good. 
For  age  would  settle  the  position  (ordo)  of  the 
primates  among  themselves,  and  then  the  senior 
amongst  them  would  become  the  primate  of  the 
first  See." 

The  defects  of  this  system  are  evident ;  for  the 
primates  would  usually  be  old  men  and  deficient 
in  energy,  or  bishops  of  unimportant  towns  and 
deficient  in  authority.  It  is,  therefore,  no  matter 
for  surprise  that  Gregory  in  his  struggle  against 
Donatism  attacked  this  organization.  The  second 
half  of  the  sixth  century  had  witnessed  a  recru- 
descence of  the  Donatist  schism.  The  reason  for 
this  must  perhaps  be  partly  sought  in  the  general 
confusion  of  the  time ;  it  must  also  be  attributed, 
in  a  measure,  to  the  negligence  of  the  Catholic 
hierarchy  and  largely  to  the  fact  that  the  severe 
civil  laws   against  the  Donatists  were  no  longer 


186  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

enforced.  The  schismatic  party  used  bribery  and 
violence  to  gain  strength.  Pope  Gregory  was  in- 
formed, as  he  himself  tells  us  in  a  letter  of  July 
23,  592,  by  Constantius  and  Mustelus,  two  deacons 
of  the  church  of  Pudentiana  in  jSTumidia,  that 
"  numbers  of  persons  after  receiving  Catholic 
baptism,  consented  for  a  bribe,  to  be  rebaptized 
by  Donatists."  ^^  Even  some  very  pious  Catho- 
lics granted  their  slaves  and  children  or  such  as 

^^Epp.  II,  46;  Jaffe,  1200;  Cfr.  Epp.  iv,  32;  Jaffg,  1304; 
IV,  35;  Jaflfg,  1305.  Dudden  in  his  Life  of  Gregory  the 
Great  seems  to  have  mistranslated  this  passage.  It  reads 
in  the  original  text:  "  Porro  aiitem  praesentium  latorum 
insinuatione  didicimus,  Donatistanim  haeresim  pro  pee- 
catis  cotidie  dilatari,  et  valde  plures  data  per  venalitatem 
licentia  post  catholicum  baptisma  a  Donatistis  denuo  bapti- 
zari."  Dudden  translates  the  last  part  of  the  sentence 
(op.  cit.  1,  415)  :  "The  Pope  laments  ....  that  numbers 
of  people,  having  obtained  leave  by  bribery,  were  submitting 
to  rebaptism  at  the  hands  of  the  Donatists."  This  we  take 
to  mean  that  the  persons  who  were  rebaptized,  bribed 
Catholics  either  personally  or  through  others  to  grant 
them  permission  to  submit  to  Donatist  baptism.  Children, 
slaves  and  perhaps  some  otherwise  dependent  persons  would 
probably  need  such  a  permission  from  their  superiors; 
free  persons  would  not.  As  the  text  speaks  of  people  in  a 
general  way,  the  following  may  be  a  less  objectionable  ren- 
dering: "Numbers  of  persons  consented  for  a  bribe  to  be 
rebaptized."  For  as  these  parties  had  already  received 
Catholic  baptism,  they  had  to  give  their  permission  or 
consent  for  the  administration  of  the  same  sacrament  by 
the  Donatists.  This  is  the  way  in  which  Kranzfelder  and 
Wolfsgruber  have  understood  the  passage.  (See  Kranz- 
felder, Gregorius  des  Grossen  ausgeivdhlte  Brief e,  116-117; 
Wolfsgruber,    Gi'egor    der    Grosse,    230). 


GREGORY   THE    GREAT   AND   SIMONY         187 

were  subject  to  them,  permission  to  receive  bap- 
tism at  the  hands  of  Donatists.^''  Although  bribery 
is  not  explicitly  mentioned  in  the  latter  case,  it 
is  natural  to  suppose,  in  the  light  of  other  state- 
ments regarding  the  Donatist  history  of  this 
period,  that  it  exercised  at  least  some  influence. 

The  Catholic  bishops  of  the  country  were  them- 
selves not  insensible  to  the  attraction  of  gold,  some 
of  them  being  ready  to  make  important  ecclesi- 
astical concessions  for  a  sum  of  money.  At  the 
very  beginning  of  his  reign,  in  August,  591, 
Gregory  had  already  received  from  the  deacons 
Felicissimus  and  Vincentius  of  the  church  of 
Lamiga,  a  very  unfavorable  report  of  affairs  in 
their  own  diocese.  They  accused  their  bishop, 
Argentius,  of  having  for  a  bribe  appointed  Dona- 
tists  to  minister  in  his  churches.  ^^  Things  stood 
no  better  at  Pudentiana.  Maximianus,  the  bishop 
of  the  latter  place,  yielding  to  pecuniary  influ- 
ences, had  consented  to  the  erection  of  altar 
against  altar  in  his  own  episcopal  city,  where  he 
permitted  a  Donatist  bishop  to  establish  himself.^*^ 

Gregory  strained  every  nerve  to  suppress  these 
abuses;  he  appealed  to  the  civil  authorities  for 
help,  and  at  the  same  time  tried  to  strengthen  the 
ecclesiastical  authorities  from  within  for  organized 

^Epp.  VI,  34;  Jaffe,  1416.  The  letter  is  of  June,  596, 
and   addressed   to  Bishop   Columbus. 

^E2}p.  I,  82;  Jaflfg,  1151.  ^' Epp.  u,  46. 


188  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

resistance.  As  has  already  been  observed,  no  new 
imperial  laws  were  necessary  to  empower  civil 
officials  to  proceed  against  the  schismatics;  such 
laws  were  already  in  existence,  but  were  not  ap- 
plied. Gregory  consequently  addressed  himself 
to  the  highest  representative  of  the  civil  authority 
in  the  land,  the  patrician  and  exarch  Gennadius 
and  asked  for  repressive  action. ^''^  Gennadius 
showed  himself  more  appreciative  of  the  advan- 
tages he  reaped  from  his  conciliatory  attitude 
towards  the  Donatists  than  heedful  of  Gregory's 
demand:  he  completely  ignored  the  pope.  An 
appeal  to  the  second  official  in  Africa,  the  pre- 
torian  prefect  Pantaleo,  met  with  no  greater 
success.^^  As  a  last  resort,  Gregory  then  ad- 
dressed himself  directly  to  the  emperor  Maurice 
and  exhorted  him  not  to  let  the  coercive  laws  re- 
main a  dead  letter.^^  It  is  doubtful  whether  the 
court  of  Constantinople  showed  greater  readiness 
to  suppress  the  schism  than  had  been  manifested 
by  its  subordinates  in  Africa.  But  even  if  the 
pope's  demands  met  with  little  or  no  response 
from  the  civil  government,  ecclesiastical  measures 
could  bring  some  compensation  for  the  deficiency. 
The  ecclesiastical  organization  of  Africa,  however, 
was  one  which  was  not  likely  to  insure  strong  and 

^'Epp.  I,  72;  Jaffe,  1141    (August,  591);  il,  73. 

^Epp.  IV,  32;  Jaffg,  1304. 

^^Epp.  VI,  61;  Jaffe,  1445    (August,  596). 


GREGORY   THE    GREAT   AND    SIMONY         189 

continuous  action  in  one  direction.  The  great 
source  of  weakness  lay  in  the  dcfecti^'c  system  of 
primacies,  already  described.  Gregory,  as  early 
as  591,  endeavored  to  abolish  the  traditional 
arrangement  and  to  substitute  a  more  efficient  one. 
He  wrote  to  this  effect  to  the  exarch  Gennadius 
and  requested  him  to  lay  before  the  next  meeting 
of  the  bishops  for  their  adoption  a  new  method 
of  electing  primates.  Gregory  wished  to  intro- 
duce a  change  in  two  important  points,  one 
respecting  the  person  and  the  other  the  residence 
of  the  primate.  On  the  one  hand  merit  and  not 
seniority  was  to  be  the  determining  factor  in  the 
election,  while  on  the  other,  the  candidate  thus 
chosen  should  have  a  fixed  see,  his  residence  to 
be  placed  not  in  this  or  that  village,  but  in  an 
important  city."**^ 

The  African  bishops,  however,  either  could  not 
convince  themselves  of  the  superiority  of  the  new 
plan,  or,  what  is  more  likely,  preferred  ancient  cus- 
tom and  tradition  to  a  wise  innovation.  We  gather 
from  a  letter  of  Gregorj^  to  the  bishops  of  Numi- 
dia,^^  that  the  latter  at  least  were  little  inclined 
to  accept  the  pope's  proposals.  The  pontiff  was 
too  wise  and  practical  a  man  to  press  the  point 
and  cause  further  division  in  the  already  much- 
divided  African  church.     He  permitted  the  old 

^"Ep.  cit.   I,   72. 

*^Epp.  I,  75;  Jaffe,  1144. 


190  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

practice  to  be  retained  merely  stipulating  that  no 
bishop  who  had  previously  been  a  Donatist,  should 
be  promoted  to  the  primacy,  even  if  seniority  were 
in  his  favor."*^ 

x\lthough  he  yielded  on  this  point,  Gregory  was 
determined  to  carry  out  his  set  purpose  of  reform- 
ing the  church  of  Africa.  There  was  one  great 
means  of  reform,  to  which  he  persistently  called 
attention  in  other  countries  and  on  the  use  of 
which  he  insisted  also  in  this  part  of  the  world, 
it  was  the  holding  of  councils.  Apart  from  the 
general  evil  of  the  spread  of  Donatism  and  the 
rebaptisms  in  the  sect  due  to  the  influence  of 
earthly  advantages,  solemn  accusations  of  bribery 
like  those  which  had  been  made  against  Bishops 
Argentius  and  Maximianus  had  to  be  investigated, 
and  if  founded  in  fact,  visited  with  punishment. 
Speaking  of  the  cases  of  Argentius  and  Maximi- 
anus in  particular,  the  pope  demanded  in  each 
case  the  convocation  of  a  council  and  the  enact- 
ment of  measures  against  the  two  alleged  offenders 
if  found  guilty. ^^  Deposition,  the  usual  penalty 
inflicted  for  simony,  was  to  be  imposed  on  Maxi- 
mianus. "  For  a  man,  who  sold  Our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  to  a  heretic  for  a  sum  of  money,  deserved 
to  be  prevented  from  handling  the  mysteries  of 
His  most  sacred  body  and  blood."  The  pope 
would     doubtless     have     pronounced     deposition 

*^Ibid.  "Epp.  cc.  I,  82;   li,  46. 


GREGORY   THE   GREAT   AND   SIMONY         191 

against  Argentius  as  well,  whose  sin  was,  to  all 
intents  and  pnrposes,  similar  to  that  of  Maximi- 
anus.  A  third  person,  whose  actions  were  to  be 
discussed  in  a  synod,  was  Bishop  Paulinus  of  Tege- 
sis  who  was  accused  of  conferring  orders  in  a 
simoniacal  manner.  It  was  about  him  that  the 
pope  wrote  in  March,  602,  to  Victor,  then  primate 
of  ISTumidia,^^  and  to  that  bishop  Columbus  of  an 
unkno^vn  see,  with  whom  he  exchanged  so  frequent 
lettcrs.^^  The  establishment  of  guilt,  according 
to  the  letters,  should  result  in  deposition  both  for 
Paulinus  and  the  purchaser.  Gregory,  in  the  same 
documents,  gives  us  the  pleasing  news  that  this  is 
the  first  case  of  the  kind  the  addressees  will  have 
to  deal  Avith.  From  this  it  would  appear  that 
simony  in  ordinations  was  much  less  prevalent 
in  Africa  than  in  other  parts  of  the  Christian 
world.  Perhaps  Gregory's  own  efforts  had  con- 
tributed, in  a  certain  degree,  to  the  existence  of 
these  healthier  moral  conditions.  Several  years 
previous  to  the  time  of  the  accusations  against 
Paulinus,  he  had,  in  a  writing  to  the  above- 
mentioned  bishop  Columbus,  called  attention  to 
the  sinful  character  of  a  promotion  to  sacred 
orders,  based  not  on  merit,  but  on  favor  or  ve- 
nality. "  If  you  know  of  such  instances  do  not 
remain   silent,    but    resist    immediately.     If   you 

"  Epp.  XII,  9 ;  Jaffe,  1859. 
^'^Epp.  xn,  8;  Jaffe,  1858. 


192  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

neglect  to  investigate  cases  of  this  kind,  or  if  you 
conceal  what  you  know,  not  only  the  author  of 
the  sin,  but  you  yourself  will  be  grievously 
guilty  before  God.  The  canonical  penalty  must 
be  visited  on  the  transgressor ;  dissimulation  would 
further  increase  the  evil."  '^^  A  document  of  a 
similar  tenor  had  also  been  forwarded  about  the 
same  time,  593,  to  Adeodatus,  who  was  the  prede- 
cessor of  Bishop  Victor  in  the  primacy  of  Numidia, 
and  whose  episcopal  see  is  unknown  to  us.'*'^  It 
is  not  unnatural  to  suppose  that  these  anti-simo- 
niacal  exhortations  and  instructions  had  been 
productive  of  immediate  results. 

But  without  indulging  too  much  in  idle  specu- 
lation, let  us  examine  a  question  to  which  some 
answer  must  be  given  before  we  leave  this  subject. 
In  how  far  did  the  African  episcopate  carry  out 
Gregory's  instructions  enjoining  upon  them  the 
convocation  of  councils?  That  one  council  was 
held  in  Africa  during  Gregory's  reign  is  usually 
admitted.^^  Carthage  probably  was  the  place  of 
meeting,  and  the  year  594  may  be  given  as  the 
date.  Only  bishops  of  the  province  of  Carthage 
seem  to  have  been  present,  but  the  enactments  of 
the    assembly    were    probably    intended    for    all 

*^Epp.   Ill,    47;    Jaffe,    1252    (July,   593). 
"  Epp.  Ill,   48;    Jaffe,   1253. 

^^Mansi,  x,  475;  Hefele,  iii,  57;   Dudden,  op.  cit.  I,  422; 
Mann,  Lives  of  the  Popes,  i,  174. 


GREGORY  THE   GREAT  AND   SIMONY        193 

Africa.^®  For  Gregory  was  apprehensive  that  all 
the  decisions  might  not  be  acceptable  to  the  other 
primates,  thiTs  becoming  a  source  of  division  in 
the  African  church.  The  minutes  of  the  council 
have  not  come  down  to  us,  and  we  know  but  little 
about  its  deliberations  and  decisions.  That  it 
took  action  against  the  Donatists  is  certain;  it 
endeavored  especially  to  stimulate  the  activity  of 
the  bishops  against  them.  Any  bishop  who  proved 
negligent  in  searching  them  out  was  to  sustain  the 
loss  of  his  dignity  and  property.  It  was  to  this 
provision  that  Gregory  objected  as  unwise  in  his 
acknowledgment  of  the  zeal  of  the  bishops  mani- 
fested in  the  holding  of  the  synod.  ^° 

In  spite  of  the  little  knowledge  which  we  have 
of  the  acts  of  this  Carthaginian  assembly,  we  may 
safely  assume  that  no  examination  took  place  of 
the  charges  which  had  been  brought  forward  at 
Rome  against  Bishops  Argentius,  Maximianus  and 
Paulinus  and  which  the  pope  had  referred  back 
to  the  African  episcopate.  The  prelates  just 
mentioned  belonged  all  three  to  the  province  of 
jN'umidia,  and  it  is  in  a  synod  of  this  province 
that  the  cases  would  have  been  examined. 
Whether  or  not  a  council  was  held  in  Numidia 
during  Gregory's  pontificate  is  a  debated  question. 

*'Mansi,  ibid.     Greg.  Epp.  v,   3;   Jaffe,   1319. 
^"Ep.  cit.  V,   3. 

13 


194  A   HISTORY   OF   SIMONY 

It  is  certain  that  one  of  the  pope's  letters  ad- 
dressed in  September,  593,  to  the  exarch  Genna- 
dius,  speaks  of  a  "  council  of  Kumidia "  (con- 
cilio  Numidiae).  The  sentence  in  which  the 
expression  occurs  reads  in  its  entirety :  "  Be  it 
known  to  your  Excellency,  that,  through  the 
arrival  of  some  persons  from  Africa,  it  has  been 
brought  to  our  knowledge,  that  in  the  council  of 
IsTumidia  many  violations  of  the  traditions  of  the 
Fathers  and  of  the  ordinances  of  the  canons,  are 
committed."  ^^  This  passage  together  with  the 
instructions  for  the  prospective  N'umidian  coun- 
cils, which  Gregory  had  issued  in  July  of  the  same 
year,  593,^^  has  appeared  to  some  writers  sufficient 
proof  for  the  admission  of  a  synod  at  this  time. 
Dudden  writes :  "  In  the  August,  probably,  of 
593,  a  synod  was  held  in  ISTumidia  under  the  presi- 
dency of  Adeodatus."  ^^  Ewald  and  Hartmann, 
the  editors  of  Gregory's  Registrum  Epistolarum 
in  the  Monumenta  Germaniae  Historica  seem  to 
hold  the  same  view.^'*  Mansi  ^^  and  Hefele,^^  on 
the  contrary,  contend  that  the  expression  concilio 

"  Epp.  TV,  7 ;  JaflF^,  1278 :  "  Cognoscat  siquidem  excel- 
lentia  vestra,  quibusdam  de  Africanis  partibus  venientibus 
ad  nos  fuisse  perlatum,  plura  in  concilio  Numidiae  contra 
patrum  tramitem  atque  canonum  statuta  committi." 

"Epp.  Ill,  47,  Jaflfg,  1252  (July,  593)  to  Bishop  Colum- 
bus; Epp.  Ill,  48,  Jaff6,  1253,  to  Bishop  Adeodatus. 

"  Greg,  the  Great,  I,  421.  "  Epp.  TV,  7,  notes. 

'^Concilia,  x,  474.  ^ Conciliengesch.  ill,  57. 


GREGORY  THE   GREAT  AND   SIMONY         195 

Numidiae,  as  used  by  Gregory  (Book  IV,  Letter 
7),  does  not  convey  the  meaning  which  we  usually 
attach  to  the  word  council.  As  Mansi  observes, 
a  council  may  very  well  have  been  held  at  the 
time  in  ISTumidia;  it  is  certain  that  one  was  to 
meet.  But  we  have  no  peremptory  argument  to 
prove  that  the  idea  was  carried  into  execution. 
The  letter  which  is  supposed  to  establish  the  point 
and  to  which  we  have  already  referred  repeatedly, 
is  couched  in  such  language  as  to  exclude,  in  all 
probability,  the  idea  of  one  particular  council. 
According  to  this  letter.  Bishop  Columbus  is  to 
investigate  the  disorders  committed  in  this  alleged 
council,  which  the  exarch  is  to  search  out  and 
punish.  There  is  evidently  no  question  here  of 
enactments  of  a  synod,  which  were  a  cause  of  re- 
laxation of  discipline.  For,  if  such  had  been  the 
case,  it  is  a  revocation  and  not  an  investigation 
which  Gregory  would  have  demanded.  The  letter 
merely  speaks  of  long-standing  abuses  which  pre- 
vailed in  the  province,  in  the  ecclesiastical  juris- 
diction of  Numidia,  that  part  of  Africa  which 
used  to  assemble  together  in  council  (ISTumidian 
council  ).^^ 

Gregory  the  Great's  uncompromising  opposition 
to  simony  forces  itself  upon  the  reader  of  his 
letters.     In  several  of  his  sermons  he  also  inveighs 

^^  Gregory  seems  to  have  used  the  word  concilium  in  a 
similar  sense  in  other  letters;  see  Epp.  I,  72;  v.  3. 


196  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

against  this  abuse.  Before  an  episcopal  audi- 
ence he  speaks  of  its  prevalence  among  the 
clergy ;  ^^  but  in  his  homilies  to  the  people  he  also 
mentions  the  subject  of  simoniacal  ordinations.^^ 
The  fact  that  even  before  a  lay  audience  no  dis- 
cretion had  to  be  used  in  this  respect  proves  that 
the  practice  was  known,  to  every  one.  But  enough 
has  been  said  of  Gregory's  work  for  the  sup- 
pression of  the  abuse.  It  is  his  influence  on  the 
development  of  anti-simoniacal  legislation  that  we 
wish  to  indicate  here.  Just  as  some  of  the  decrees 
of  his  predecessors  and  of  councils  on  this  point 
were  received  into  the  "  Corpus  Juris  Canonici," 
so  likewise  some  of  Gregory's  utterances  became 
and  still  remain  ecclesiastical  law.^^  It  is  true  that 
some  of  his  prohibitions  contained  little  that  was 
new.  The  sale  of  ecclesiastical  offices,  especially 
bishoprics,  had  been  frequently  forbidden  before 
him.  The  episcopal  office  had  become  a  much- 
coveted  position  at  an  early  date,  and  restrictive 
legislation  was  the  consequence.  The  ecclesiastical 
organization  had  not  been  modified  to  the  extent 
of  demanding  in  Gregory's  time  new  laws  pro- 
hibitive of  simony,  or  any  considerable  extension 

^^  Horn,  in  Evang.  Lib.  I,  xvii,  7,  PL.  76,  1141-42  and 
especially  Lib.  I,  xvn,  13,  PL.  76,   1145-46. 

^'Hom.  in  Evang.  Lib.  I,  IV,  4,  PL.  76,  1091-92;  see 
Horn,  in  Evang.  Lib.  II,  xxxix,  2  and  xxxix,  6,  PL.  76, 
1294-95  and  1297. 

•""  See  on  this  point,  Corpus  Juris  Can.  Causa  i,  Quaest.  1. 


GREGORY   THE   GREAT  AND   SIMONY         I97 

of  the  old  ones.  Ecclesiastical  patronage,  the 
recognition  of  which  some  find  in  the  tenth  canon 
of  the  council  of  Orange,  held  in  441,*^^  had  not 
yet  received  sufficient  development  to  lead  to  grave 
abuses.  Benefices  had  come  into  existence  under 
the  name  of  Precariae,  but  were  still  in  the 
formative  period  of  their  history.®^  The  sale  of 
sacramental  graces  other  than  ordination  was  not 
universally  prevalent.  Hence,  as  regards  the 
spiritual  object  of  a  simoniacal  transaction,  Gre- 
gory made  no  addition  to  the  already  existing 
legislation. 

There  was  one  point,  however,  which  was  either 
consciously  or  unconsciously  misinterpreted  in 
Gregory's  time,  viz.,  the  meaning  of  the  ex- 
pression, "  present,  reward,  earthly  price."  Some 
persons  sought  to  elude  the  existing  laws  by  the 
nature  of  the  compensation  which  they  gave  or 
received  for  spiritual  favors.  That  the  payment 
of  money  or  the  gift  of  other  valuable  material 
objects  was  forbidden  was  clear,  and  they  did  not 
give  them  in  exchange.  But  in  return  for  pro- 
motion to  the  episcopal  or  the  sacerdotal  dignity, 
they  could  promise  other  temporal  advantages. 
John  the  Deacon  tells  us  ®^  that  they  experienced 

*^A  contrary  opinion  is  expressed  by  Hinschius-Stutz  in 
Realenc.  fiir  prot.  Theologie,  3d  ed.  s.  v.  Patronat. 
*^  Creagh  in  Cath.  Encyc.  s.  v.  Benefice. 
"^  Vita  Greg,  ni,  6, 


198  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

no  difficulty  in  finding  ecclesiastical  personages 
willing  to  accept  such  promises  or  offers  and  to 
grant  preferments.  Some  candidates  pledged  more 
than  usual  submissiveness  to  the  will  and  desires  of 
the  consecrating  or  ordaining  prelate.  In  exchange 
for  ecclesiastical  appointment,  others  promised  to 
recommend  to  powerful  personages,  those  to  whom 
they  owed  their  dignity.  The  allurements  of  such 
advantages  also  operated  in  another  way.  A 
bishop  might  reject  a  candidate  because  of  the 
absence  of  the  necessary  qualifications  for  an  eccle- 
siastical office;  but  influential  parties  interposed, 
supplications  and  patronage  were  used  and  the 
reluctant  prelate  would  yield  to  these  influences. 
The  nomination  meant  honor  for  a  certain  family 
or  party;  but  it  too  frequently  meant  dishonor 
for  the  Church.  It  became  imperative  to  take 
decisive  action  against  these  abuses,  and  Gregory 
permanently  stated  the  full  meaning  of  the  earthly 
price  given  in  exchange  for  something  spiritual. 
In  his  Letters  ®^  he  had  frequently  insisted  that 
not  only  money,  but  the  influence  of  important 
men,  the  petitions  of  certain  parties  should  play 
no  role  in  episcopal  elections  or  ecclesiastical  pre- 
ferments. It  was  in  one  of  his  homilies  ®^  that 
he  gave  the  threefold  division  of  the  price  into 

"Cfr.  Epp.  Ill,  22;  V,  16,  63;  vi,  7,  27,  etc. 
'^Hom.  in  Evang.   Lib.    I,   IV,   4,  PL.   76,   1091-92;    Joh. 
Diac.   Vita  Oreg.  iii,   6. 


GREGORY   THE    GREAT   AND   SIMONY         199 

*'  Munus  ah  ohsequio,  munus  a  manu,  munus  a 
lingua."  This  division  became  classical  after  him 
and  is  used  to  this  day  by  writers  on  the  subject. 
Some  may  boast  of  their  integrity  because  they 
received  neither  money  nor  any  other  material 
price  {munus  a  manu)  for  the  spiritual  favor ; 
but  they  are  none  the  less  guilty,  if  instead  of  this, 
they  appointed  a  candidate  in  compensation  for 
special  and  undue  services  which  he  would  render 
them  (munus  ah  ohsequio)  or  for  recommendation 
in  high  places  (munus  a  lingua)."  ^^  In  all 
these  cases,  according  to  Gregory,  the  sin  of  simony 
exists,  as  there  is  exchange  of  the  spiritual  for  the 
temporal.  Subsequent  ages  have  brought  no  ad- 
dition to  this  interpretation  of  the  material  price. 


Corpus  Juris  Can.  cap.  114,  C.  i,  Q.  1. 


CHAPTER  IX 

SIMONY  IN  THE  WEST  FROM  THE  DEATH  OF 

GREGORY  THE  GREAT  TO  THE  DEATH 

OF  CHARLEMAGNE  (604  TO  814) 

I.  Prevalence  of  Simony: — Papal  elections  and  the 
civil  power  —  Pope  Zachaiy,  Boniface  and  the  pallium- 
affair  —  Charlemagne,  Alcuin  and  simony  in  Italy  — 
Simony  in  France  —  Occurrences  at  Soissons  and  Cler- 
mont —  Charles  Martel  —  Ecclesiastical  conditions 
under  the  Carolingians  —  Simony  in  Spain  and  in  Eng- 
land. II.  Anti-simoniacal  LEGISLATION: — The  Liber 
Diurnus  in  Italy  —  The  Capitulary  of  Mantua;  the 
council  of  Rome  and  that  of  Forojulium  —  Councils  in 
France  —  Regulations  on  special  topics  —  Spanish  and 
Anglo-Saxon  legislation. 

I.     Prevalence   of   Simony 

Gregory  the  Great  had  made  a  bold  and  per- 
sistent attack  upon  the  traffic  in  ecclesiastical 
positions.  That  his  policy,  however,  would  result 
in  the  complete  or  almost  complete  suppression 
of  the  abuse  for  any  considerable  length  of  time 
could  hardly  be  expected.  The  lines  along  which 
the  relations  between  the  ecclesiastical  and  the  civil 
governments  had  developed,  assured  to  the  secular 
authorities  large  control  over  church  affairs  and 
to  the  bishops  considerable  power  in  civil  admin- 
istrative concerns.  In  such  a  state  of  things  it 
200 


FROM  THE   YEAR   604   TO   814  201 

was  extremely  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  banish 
all  intrigue,  solicitation  and  venality  from  the 
nomination  to  offices  in  the  Church.  At  Rome 
a  sum  of  money  continued  to  be  paid  after  Greg- 
ory's death  to  the  emperors  of  Constantinople  for 
their  confirmation  of  papal  elections.  It  was 
only  towards  the  end  of  the  seventh  century  that 
Pope  Agatho  (678-81)  obtained  from  the  em- 
peror Constantino  Pogonatus  the  remittal  of  the 
customary  tribute.^  The  emperor,  however,  in- 
sisted on  his  privilege  of  confirmation,  but  during 
the  reign  of  Pope  Benedict  II  (684-85)  delegated 
his  power  to  the  exarch  at  Ravenna.^  It  is  pos- 
sible that  no  formal  delegation  took  place.  Yet 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  exarchs  intervened  in  the 
choice  of  a  successor  to  the  See  of  Peter.  It  ap- 
pears clearly  from  the  history  of  the  election  of 
Pope  Conon  (686)  that  the  confirmation  was 
not  suppressed.  We  are  told  that,  as  usual  (ut 
mos  est),  an  embassy  was  sent  to  the  exarch  Theo- 
dore.^ Conon  reigned  but  a  very  short  time.  At 
the  election  of  his  successor  (687),  the  part  played 
by  the  exarch  was  nothing  short  of  disastrous. 
John  Platys,  who  then  held  that  office,  was  ap- 

^Lib.  Pont.  1,  354  seq;   see  also,  358,  note  34. 

'Lib.  Pont.  I,  363. 

^Lib.  Pont.  I,  368;  for  the  interpretation  of  the  "  ut  mos 
est"  see  Duchesne,  in  Biblioth.  de  VEcole  des  Chartes 
(1891),  LU,   14-15. 


202  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

proached  by  the  archdeacon  Paschal,  who  offered 
to  pay  him  100  pounds  of  gold  for  the  papal 
dignity.  The  exarch  apparently  accepted  the 
offer.  Two  Roman  parties  elected  their  own 
candidates,  one  the  archpriest  Theodore,  the  other 
the  archdeacon  Paschal.  Neither  of  the  two  suc- 
cessful ecclesiastics  would  yield  to  his  rival,  so  that, 
as  had  been  done  at  the  previous  election,  a  com- 
promise candidate  was  chosen  in  the  person  of 
Sergius  (687-YOl).  The  archpriest  Theodore 
immediately  submitted  to  the  choice  of  the  more 
judicious  and  more  powerful  part  of  Rome.  But 
not  so  Paschal.  He  reluctantly  acknowledged  the 
authority  of  Sergius,  and  meanwhile  again  made 
promises  of  money  or  other  gifts  to  the  exarch  to 
induce  him  to  come  personally  to  Rome.  The 
latter  unexpectedly  made  his  appearance  in  the 
city  of  the  popes ;  but  he  arrived  too  late.  Things 
were  in  such  an  advanced  stage  that  he  could  no 
longer  bring  forward  Paschal.  He  insisted,  never- 
theless, that  Sergius  should  redeem  Paschal's 
promise  and  pay  the  100  pounds  of  gold.  Sergius 
protested  that  he  personally  had  not  entered  into 
any  engagement,  and  that  he  was  not  able  to  pay 
the  amount  demanded  of  him.  But  the  exarch 
remained  so  inflexible  that  it  was  necessary  to 
mortgage  some  of  the  decorations  of  St.  Peter's 
in  order  to  pay  him  the  stipulated  sum.'* 

*Lib.  Pont.  I,  368-72. 


FROM  THE   YEAR   604   TO   814  203 

During  the  latter  part  of  the  period  ready 
credence  was  given  to  some  accusations  of  simony 
levelled  against  the  pope  and  the  Italian  clergy. 
Boniface,  the  apostle  of  Germany,  was  informed 
(from  what  source  and  on  what  authority  it  is 
impossible  to  tell),  that  the  abuse  existed  at  the 
pontifical  court.  In  a  letter,  which  is  lost,  he 
remonstrated  with  Pope  Zachary  on  this  subject. 
The  latter,  in  his  answer  of  the  year  744  from 
which  we  derive  our  information,  indignantly 
repudiated  the  charge.  Boniface  had  requested 
the  pontiff  to  bestow  the  pallium  on  the  three 
archbishops,  Grimo  of  Rouen,  Abel  of  Rheims 
and  Hartbert  of  Sens,  and  his  request  had  been 
granted.  Before  the  favorable  answer  from  Rome 
reached  him,  the  great  missionary  heard  it 
rumored  that  payment  had  been  demanded  for  the 
bestowal  of  the  ecclesiastical  insignia.  He  dis- 
patched another  letter  to  the  pope,  in  which, 
instead  of  three  pallia,  he  asked  for  but  one, 
that  for  Grimo,  the  archbishop  of  Rouen.  At  the 
same  time  he  complained  of  the  existence  of 
simony  at  Rome,  where  emoluments  were  de- 
manded or  expected  for  such  a  favor.  The  pope 
vehemently  protested  that  the  imputation  was 
false;  that  neither  he  nor  his  clergy  exacted,  de- 
manded, or  accepted  money  or  reward  for  the 
bestowal  of  the  pallium.  He  forbade  Boniface 
to  write  to  him  a  second  time  in  the  same  strain. 


204  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

"  Far  from  us  and  our  clergy,  that  we  should  sell 
for  a  price  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  we 
have  gratuitously  received.  None  of  them  demanded 
any  compensation  for  the  bestowal  of  the  three 
pallia,  which,  as  above  stated,  we  granted  at  your 
request.  We  ourselves,  and  not  they  (the  arch- 
bishops), bore  the  expense  of  the  charters,  which  we 
usually  send  as  credentials  in  such  cases.  Your  fra- 
ternity must  abstain  from  objecting  to  us  even  the 
name  of  the  simoniacal  crime,  for  we  anathematize 
all  such  as  dare  to  sell  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
for  an  earthly  price."  ^ 

From  later  letters,  one  of  which  was  written  by 
Boniface,  the  other  by  Pope  Zachary,  we  know 
the  pallium  affair  had  not  yet  been  settled  in 
751.6 

During  Pope  Hadrian's  reign,  Charlemagne 
addressed  a  similar  complaint  to  the  pontiff 
(790-91).  The  emperor  had  been  informed  by 
his  "  Missi "  that  simony  in  episcopal  consecra- 
tions was  rampant  in  Tuscany  and  many  other 
parts  of  Italy,  including  the  city  of  Ravenna. 
Large  sums  of  money  were  spent  in  this  execrable 
practice.  To  such  an  extent  had  the  evil  gained 
ground  that  the  resources  in  gold  and  silver  of  some 

^MGE.  Epp.  Ill,  Epp.  Aevi  Mer.  et  Ear.  i,  315;  see 
Hefele,  Conciliengesch.  iii,  514;  Hauck,  Kircheng.  Deutsch- 
lands,  I,   543-44,   3d  and   4th   ed.    (Leipzig,    1904). 

« MGH.  vol.  cit.  368,  370. 


FROM  THE   YEAR   604   TO   814  205 

churches  had  been  exhausted,  and  as  a  consequence, 
church  property  was  alienated.  It  was  leased  out 
in  virtue  of  the  contract  known  as  "  emphyteusis." 
The  pope  answered  this  report  of  the  imperial 
officials  by  protesting  his  innocence.  ISTever  had 
he  knowingly  consecrated  any  simoniacal  can- 
didate, nor  would  he  listen  to  a  proposition  made 
by  any  power  whatsoever  in  favor  of  such.  But 
neither  should  the  emperor  indulge  in  such  prac- 
tices. The  pope  consecrates  only  those  who  are 
canonically  elected  to  the  episcopal  office  by  the 
clergy  and  people,  and  before  the  ceremony  the 
candidate  is  specifically  questioned  regarding  his 
freedom  from  simony.  He  must,  moreover,  sign 
an  oath  that  he  will  never  accept  anything  for 
ordinations.'^ 

These  protestations  only  temporarily  reassured 
the  emperor.  Shortly  after  the  accession  of 
Leo  III  (795-816i,)  he  considered  the  suppression 
of  simony  one  of  the  most  important  duties  to  be 
impressed  upon  the  mind  of  the  new  pope  (Y96), 
on  account  of  the  great  ravages  made  by  this  evil 
in  so  many  places.^ 

A  few  years  later  (802),  Alcuin,  writing  to 
Arno,  archbishop  of  Salzburg,  also  refers  to  the 
deleterious  influence  of  simony.  With  the  touch- 
ing and  timid  humility  of  the  inferior,  he  deplores 

'  MGH.  Epp.  m,  634;  Jaffe,  Reg.  2478;  Bill.  Rer.  Ger.  98. 
^MGH.  Epp.  IV,  136. 


206  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

the  sad  condition  of  the  Church  in  general  and  of 
the  Apostolic  See  in  particular  owing  to  the  preva- 
lence of  simony.^  The  conviction  evidently  ex- 
isted at  this  time  at  the  Frankish  court  that 
bribery  played  a  very  large  part  in  ecclesiastical 
affairs  at  Rome. 

From  the  Life  of  SL  Eligius,  to  which  reference 
has  already  been  made,  an  idea  may  be  gained  of 
conditions  in  France  at  the  beginning  of  this  period. 
The  author  of  this  work  relates  that  in  the  Saint's 
time,  viz.,  in  the  first  half  of  the  seventh  century, 
the  destructive  sin  of  simony  was  rampant  in  the 
cities  and  in  all  parts  of  the  Frankish  kingdom.^® 
From  the  biographer  of  Queen  Bathilde  we  learn 
that  she  lived  at  a  period  when  simony  stained 
the  Church  of  God.^^ 

The  longer  Life  of  St.  Sulyitius,  as  given  in 
the  Bollandist  edition,  speaks  of  the  profusion 
with  which  gold  and  silver  were  offered  in  the 
election  of  a  successor  to  Austregisil  in  the  archi- 
episcopal  see  of  Bourges.  But  the  influence  of 
the  queen  is  said  to  have  been  more  powerful 
than  that  of  money.  Sulpitius  II  or  Pius,  whose 
character  was  above  reproach,  secured  the  nomi- 
nation  and   ruled  the   diocese   for  twenty  years 

•MGF.  Epp.  IV,  416. 

"  Vita  Eligii,  Lib.  n,  c.  1,  MGH.  8S.  Rer.  Merov.  Tom. 
XV,  694-95. 

^MGH.  8S.  Rer.  Mer.  u,  488. 


FROM  THE   YEAR   604  TO    814  207 

(624-44).^-  The  authority  of  this  passage  of  the 
Life  of  St.  Sulpitius  has  been  questioned  by 
Krusch,  who  has  not  received  it  into  his  edition 
of  the  writing.  ^^ 

About  the  year  652  the  monk  Bettolenus,  as  he 
himself  afterwards  confessed,  bought  the  bishopric 
of  Soissons.  He  later  (656)  resigned  in  conse- 
quence of  this  irregnilarity  in  his  promotion.  The 
resignation  was  not  in  any  way  compulsory;  for, 
as  the  chronicler  observes,  there  was  not  a  person 
then  in  existence  who  would  have  avenged  such 
a  deed.  The  renunciation  was  a  free  act  of 
reparation  on  the  part  of  Bettolenus.^^ 

How  fearlessly  the  evil  could  manifest  itself 
is  evidenced  by  the  events  which  occurred  at  Cler- 
mont about  665.  Felix,  the  bishop  of  the  city, 
had  died.  Prejectus,  abbot  of  the  local  mon- 
astery of  Chantoin  seems  to  have  believed  that  he 
was  destined  by  God  to  fill  the  vacancy.  He  in- 
formed his  fellow-citizens  of  a  vision  that  had 
been  narrated  to  him  by  his  mother  to  the  effect 
that  he  would  become  a  bishop.  In  reply,  he  was 
bluntly  asked  by  those  whom  he  addressed  whether 
he  had  enough  gold  and  silver  to  attain  the  end 
he  had  in  view.  To  this  Prejectus  retorted  that, 
if  God  had  selected  him  for  the  office,  the  authority 

"AA.  8S.  Jan.  n,  533. 

^MGE.  88.  Rer.   Mer.  iv,   364-380. 

"  Vita  Drausc.  AA.  88.  Mart,  i,  404-405. 


208  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

of  the  canons  would  dispense  him  from  any  ex- 
penditure for  it.  In  spite  of  his  confidence, 
money  was  powerful  enough  to  assure  momen- 
tarily the  success  of  an  unscrupulous  rival.  The 
archdeacon  Gervald  (Garivaldus),  unable  to  secure 
the  dignity  by  honest  effort,  bought  the  suffrages 
of  the  laity.  The  latter  brought  pressure  to  bear 
upon  the  clergy  to  such  an  extent  that  some  of 
them  yielded.  Thus  the  majority  of  the  votes 
were  cast  for  Gervald,  who  took  possession  of  the 
see  of  Clermont.  But  his  reign  was  to  be  of  short 
duration.  For,  40  days  later,  death  put  an  end 
to  his  career,  and  the  alleged  vision  concerning 
the  person  of  Prejectus  now  received  its  reali- 
zation.^^ 

Under  the  last  Merovingian  kings,  the  weakness 
and  impotence  of  these  rulers,  which  was  the  cause 
of  so  much  confusion,  naturally  made  itself  felt 
also  in  the  Church.  While  there  is  but  little 
direct  and  specific  evidence  ^^  tending  to  prove 
that  simony  was  very  prevalent,  it  is  certain  that 
bishoprics  were  freely  given  to  favorites,  to  men 
of  civil  or  military  merit,  but  of  no  ecclesiastical 
training,  spirit,  or  conduct.     The  appointment  of 

^  The  text  of  a  newly  discovered  manuscript  narrating 
these  events  was  published  by  Vacandard  in  Rev.  quest, 
hist.  (1898),  LXiii,  373-74  note.  See  also  AA.  S8.  Jan. 
in,  248. 

^*  See  Pirminus  in  his  Scarapsus  de  Sing.  Libris  Canon. 
PL.  89,  1035. 


FROM  THE   YEAR    604   TO    814  209 

such  men  was  one  of  the  characteristics  of  the 
administration  of  the  great  major-domo  Charles 
Martel  (717-41).  Charles  undoubtedly  rendered 
invaluable  service  to  Christianity,  especially  by 
repelling  the  Saracen  hordes.  But  in  his  appoint- 
ments to  ecclesiastical  offices,  he  was  not  always 
actuated  by  the  desire  to  advance  the  interests  of 
the  Church.  He  looked  upon  the  nominations  to 
church  dignities  as  an  effectual  and  necessary 
means  of  strengthening  his  political  and  military 
position.  Bishoprics  and  abbeys  became  the  re- 
ward of  his  followers,  principally  soldiers  who  had 
fought  under  him.  Some  of  these  became  the 
simultaneous  incumbents  of  several  ecclesiastical 
benefices.  ^'^ 

Under  the  Carlovingian  kings,  ecclesiastical  con- 
ditions, though  not  so  unfavorable,  were  far  from 
perfect.  The  great  development  of  ecclesiastical 
patronage  became  an  important  source  of  unholy 
traffic.  The  donation  of  landed  estate  to  churches, 
or  the  construction  of  churches  on  private  property 
with  private  means  became  a  not  uncommon  bene- 
faction, which  was  fittingly  rewarded  by  ecclesi- 
astical authorities:  the  right  of  presenting  a  can- 
didate for  the  charge  was  granted  the  generous 

"  The  state  of  the  Prankish  church  at  this  epoch  is 
described  in  a  letter  addressed  in  742  by  Boniface  to  Pope 
Zachary.  It  is  found  in  MGH.  Epp.  iii,  298-302.  See  also 
Hergenrother-Kirsch,   Kircliengesch.   ii,   53-54. 

14 


210  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

donor.  The  post  was  frequently  a  remunerative 
one.  This  fact  soon  led  the  lay  persons  who  had 
a  right  of  designating  a  candidate  for  the  nomina- 
tion to  expect  a  compensation  for  their  presenta- 
tion. It  also  inclined  ecclesiastics  to  come  up  to 
the  expectations  of  the  patrons  on  whom  they  had 
partly  to  depend  for  their  appointment.^^ 

Certain  abbots  now  began  to  demand  a  fee  for 
admission  to  their  monasteries,^^  while  the  abuse 
known  as  the  plurality  or  cumulation  of  benefices 
did  not  cease  to  exist.  Even  in  the  time  of  Charle- 
magne not  a  few  bishops  were  simultaneously 
heads  of  important  dioceses  and  abbots  of  one  or 
more  monasteries. -°  'Nor  was  it  uncommon  to 
find  men  vested  with  authority  over  several 
abbeys.  Thus  Alcuin  was  abbot  of  the  following 
monasteries:  Ferrieres  in  the  diocese  of  Sens, 
St.  Lupus  at  Troyes,  Flavigny  (diocese  of  Au- 
tun),  St.  Josse-sur-mer  (diocese  of  Amiens),  and 
St.  Martin  at  Tours. -^  Although  no  instance  of 
simony  can  be  cited  in  which  the  Carolingians 
had  a  share,  it  is  certain  that  the  evil  was  not 


"See  MGH.  Concilia  II,  i,  282,  c.  42  and  288,  c.  15; 
Dresdner,  Kultur-  und  Sittengesch.  der  Ital.  Geistlichkeit, 
38-41. 

"Synod  of  Frankfort  (794)   in  MGH.  Concilia,  II,  i,  168. 

'"  See  instances  of  this  kind  quoted  by  Ketterer,  Karl 
der  Grosse  und  die  Kirche,   181,  note   1. 

-^  See  Ketterer,  op.  cit.  214,  note  5. 


FROM   THE   YEAR    604   TO    814  211 

extinct.  The  reign  of  Charlemagne  was  far  ad- 
vanced in  its  course,  when  Alcnin  could  still 
deprecate,  in  verses  addressed  to  him,  the  preva- 
lence of  simony  (800).  Among  the  abuses  which 
demanded  the  attention  of  this  powerful  ruler, 
was  the  bestowal  of  divine  gifts  for  remuneration : 

"  Plurima  nempe   tibi   sunt   emendanda   per  orbem, 

O  Rex,  o  rector,  o  decus  ecclesiae! 
Simoniaca  quidem   pululat  male  pestis   in  orbe, 

Muneribus   dantur   mystica   dona  dei. 
Quae  deus  aeternus  cunctis  impendere  gratis 

Jiisserat,  ut  gratis  aceipit  ipse  dator."  ^ 

At  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  century,  the 
kings  in  Spain  had,  as  Gams  remarks,-^  taken  the 
episcopal  elections  into  their  own  hands.  The 
fourth  council  of  Toledo  (633)  relates  that,  to 
obtain  the  episcopal  office,  some  had  recourse  to 
intrigues,  others  to  gifts;  that  criminals  and 
soldiers  were  promoted  to  the  position.  After  this 
statement  of  existing  conditions,  the  Fathers  of 
the  council  make  the  frank  admission  that  so  great 
would  be  the  disturbance  aroused  in  the  Church 
by  the  removal  of  these  persons  that  they  prefer 
to  ignore  the  past  and  merely  issue  preventive 
measures  for  the  future.^'*     Other  councils  held 

'^  MGH.  Poetae  Lat.  Aevi  Carol,  i,  258,  verss.  43  seqq. 
^  Kirchengesch.  Span.   II,   ii,   80. 
"Mansi,  x,  624,  can.    19. 


212  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

in  the  same  city  ^^  also  deplored  the  fact  that,  in 
spite  of  the  multiplicity  of  prohibitions,  the  simo- 
niacal  evil,  far  from  abating,  had  rather  gained 
in  strength. 

The  invasion  of  Spain  by  the  Arabs,  which 
opened  with  the  battle  of  Jerez  de  la  Frontera 
(711),  brought  about  a  considerable  change  in 
ecclesiastical  affairs.  Simony  in  ordinations 
probably  decreased  in  Moorish  Spain;  but  it  is 
certain  on  the  other  hand  that,  owing  to  the 
material  advantages  accruing  to  them  from  their 
apostacy,  Spanish  Christians  were  exposed  to  great 
temptations  of  denying  their  faith.  "^ 

The  first  king  of  the  Angles  to  sell  a  bishopric 
was,  according  to  William  of  Malmesbury,  Wulf- 
here  of  Mercia.^^  The  other  party  to  the  trans- 
action, which  was  concluded  in  666,  was  Bishop 
Wini.  Wini  had  been  created  bishop  of  the  west- 
ern portion  of  the  West-Saxons  about  663.  His 
promotion  was  due  to  King  Cenwalh's  desire  to 
have  in  his  kingdom  a  bishop  conversant  with  the 
Saxon  tongue,  for  the  sole  bishop  of  the  realm, 
Agilbert,  was  ignorant  of  the  language.  Upon 
Wini's  intrusion,  Agilbert  left  the  kingdom,  and 

"The  eighth  council  of  Toledo  (653)  in  Mansi,  x,  1216, 
can.  3;  and  the  eleventh  council  of  Toledo  (675)  in  Mansi, 
XI,  142,  can.  9. 

=«  Gams,  op.  cit.  II,  ii,  300. 

"  Gesta  Regum   Anglorum,   i,   76. 


FROM   THE   YEAR   604   TO    814  213 

Wini  remained  the  only  bishop  of  the  West-Saxons, 
with  his  see  at  Winchester.  But  the  king,  who  had 
found  fault  with  Agilbert,  also  quarreled  with 
Wini.  For  some  unknown  reason  the  latter  was 
constrained  to  leave  the  kingdom  and  proceeded  to 
Mercia.  Here  he  bought  the  see  of  London  from 
King  Wulfhere.^^  Bede,  to  whom  we  are  indebted 
for  this  information,  adds  that  he  held  this  see 
until  his  death  (c.  675).  This  statement  must 
undoubtedly  be  preferred  to  the  assertion  of  Rud- 
borne,  a  writer  of  the  later  Middle  xiges,  according 
to  which  Wini,  repenting  of  his  simony,  retired 
to  Winchester  and  lived  there  as  a  penitent  during 
the  last  three  years  of  his  life.^^ 

This  exposition  of  simoniacal  dealings  may  be 
concluded  with  the  mention  of  a  practice  which 
originated  at  Rome  about  the  beginning  of  the 
ninth  century,  viz.,  the  trade  in  relics.  It  chiefly 
flourished  subsequently  to  our  period,  but  can 
hardly  have  been  completely  unknown  before  814. 
Some  interesting  pages  on  this  topic  entitled 
"  Roman  Relics  in  the  ]!^inth  Century,"  will  be 
found  in  J.  Guiraud's  Questions  d'Histoire  et 
d' Archeologie  Chretienne.^^ 


^  Bede,  Hist.  Ecc.  in,  7,  in  Plummer,  Bedae  Opera  Hist. 
I,   141    (Oxford,   1896). 
^  Anglia  Sacra,  i,  192. 
="235-261    (Paris,    1906). 


214  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

II.     Anti-Simoniacal  Legislation 

While  but  few  anti-simoniacal  laws  special  to 
Italy  were  passed  during  the  seventh  and  eighth 
centuries,  some  of  the  earlier  prohibitions  were 
made  more  accessible  by  their  appearance  in  col- 
lections of  instructions  and  enactments  prepared 
for  practical  purposes.  A  collection  of  this  kind 
was  the  Liber  Diurnus  of  the  Roman  church,  one 
of  the  important  literary  remains  of  the  period. 
It  contains  formularies  in  use  at  the  important 
functions  and  events  in  that  church,  and  was 
formed  into  a  collection  between  the  years  685  and 
751,  though  most  of  its  component  parts  go  back 
to  an  earlier  date.  The  influence  of  the  writings 
of  Gregory  the  Great  clearly  appears  in  the  anti- 
simoniacal  measures  which  it  contains.  Sufiice 
it,  therefore,  to  note  here  the  fact  which  we  learn 
from  it  that  the  newly  created  suburbicarian 
bishops,  solemnly  pledged  themselves  not  to  accept 
any  fee  for  the  administration  of  the  sacraments.^^ 
The  formula  of  a  similar  promise  made  by  the 
bishops  of  Italy  is  found  in  the  minutes  of  the 
Capitulary  of  Mantua,  held  perhaps  in  the  year 
787.  It  is  noteworthy  because  it  is  of  a  greater 
definiteness  and  precision  than  most  anterior  enact- 
ments of  a  similar  nature.    It  reads :  "  We  promise 

^*  Cautio  Episcopi.  no,   74,  ed.   Rozifere. 


FROM   THE   YEAR    604   TO    814  215 

not  to  receive  any  reward  for  the  ordinations  of 
priests  and  other  clerics,  neither  from  themselves, 
or  from  their  relatives  or  friends,  either  privately 
or  publicly."  ^^ 

Another  passage  of  the  same  Capitulary  reminds 
the  bishops  of  their  duty  on  a  kindred  subject. 
On  their  visits  through  their  dioceses  they  must 
not  exact  or  take  a  heavier  contribution  than  is 
permitted  by  either  the  canons  or  custom ;  and  the 
people  must  not  suffer  oppression  either  from  them 
or  their  retinue. ^^ 

As  to  the  new  mode  of  papal  election  introduced 
by  the  council  of  Rome  in  769,  it  made  but  indi- 
rectly for  the  suppression  of  venality.  The  synod 
reduced  very  considerably  the  power  of  the  laity 
in  naming  a  bishop  of  Rome.  IvTo  soldiers  of 
the  armies  stationed  in  Tuscany  and  Cam- 
pania were  allowed  to  appear  in  Rome  during  the 
election,  nor  were  servants  of  clerics  or  military 
persons  present  in  the  city  permitted  to  carry 
arms.  Only  a  cardinal-priest  or  a  cardinal-deacon 
was  to  be  eligible  for  the  papacy,  and  the  people 
were  to  have  no  part  in  the  election.^^ 

Very  explicit,  on  the  contrary,  in  its  condemna- 
tion of  simony  among  clerics  was  the  council  of 

^MGE.  Capit.  i,  195,  c.   10,  ed.  Boretius. 
"76id.  c.  5. 

^  MGH.   Concil.   II,   i,   76   seqq. ;    Hefele,   Gonciliengesch. 
m,  434-39. 


216  A    HISTOEY    OF    SIMONY 

Forojulium  or  Forum  Julii.  The  name  of  the 
place  where  it  was  held  has  been  perpetuated  in 
the  modern  name  of  the  territory  of  Friuli.  The 
city  formerly  known  as  Forojulium  is  to-day  called 
Cividad  or  Cividale.  When  the  council  was  held 
(796  or  797),  it  was  the  residence  of  the  patri- 
archs of  Aquileia.  The  prohibition  of  simony, 
issued  by  the  synod,  is  emphatic,  but  contains 
nothing  new.^^ 

In  France,  councils  and  capitularies  issued  anti- 
simoniacal  laws  with  monotonous  regularity  dur- 
ing the  period.  The  national  council  of  Paris 
(October  10,  614)  decreed  that  "  at  the  death  of 
a  bishop,  that  candidate  ought  to  be  consecrated 
to  succeed  him,  whom  the  metropolitan,  the  bishops 
of  the  province,  the  clergy,  and  the  people  had 
elected  without  yielding  to  private  interests  or  the 
influence  of  money."  ^^  The  decree,  very  explicit 
in  the  mention  of  the  persons  who  had  a  share  in 
the  creation  of  bishops,  had  the  defect  of  sinning 
grievously  by  omission.  The  king,  whose  right 
of  confirmation  of  episcopal  elections,  had  long 
since  been  recognized,  was  entirely  ignored.  The 
monarch  then  occupying  the  throne  was  Clo- 
thaire  II,  who  had  become  sole  ruler  of  the 
Prankish  dominions  in  613.  He  speedily  obtained 
redress.     In  the  edict  confirmatory  of  the  synod, 

^MGE.   Concilia,   II,  I,    190,  can.    1. 
^MOH.  Concilia,  i,  186,  can.  2. 


FROM   THE   YEAR   604   TO   814  217 

published  October  18,  615,  he  stipulated  that  the 
bishop-elect  must  obtain  royal  confirmation.^'^ 

Subsequent  synods  gave  their  approbation  to  the 
Parisian  decrees  in  the  sense  in  which  they  had 
been  sanctioned  by  Clothaire.  This  was  done  by 
the  council  held  after  614  at  an  unknown  place 
(perhaps  Bonogelo,  Bonneuil,  near  Paris), ^®  and 
by  the  councils  of  Clichy  (626  or  627),^^  and 
Rheims  (between  627  and  630). ^« 

The  repressive  enactments  of  synods  were  at  the 
same  time  supplemented  by  the  individual  efforts 
of  persons  in  high  station.  Protadius,  bishop  of 
Besangon  (c.  612-24),  probably  waged  war  against 
simoniacal  practices,"*^  thus  continuing  a  policy 
which  seems  to  have  been  in  honor  during  the  rule 
of  his  immediate  predecessor  ISTicetius.^^  The 
passage  which  explicitly  speaks  of  his  activity 
cannot  refer  to  the  time  of  his  episcopate,  since  it 
commends  his  zeal  displayed  in  this  line  during 
the  pontificate  of  Gregory  the  Great,  who  died  in 
604.  It  is  nevertheless  probable  that  he  opposed 
simony  in  the  position  which  he  occupied  previous 
to  his  elevation  to  the  episcopal  dignity.  This 
attitude  he  would  hardly  have  modified,  when  once 
raised  to  the  government  of  a  diocese. 

'''PL.   80,  451,  no.   1   of  the  edict. 

"^MGH.  Concilia,  I,   193,  can.   1. 

'"Ibid.  196-97,  can.  4.  *°  Ibid.   203,   can.    3. 

"AA.  88.  Feb.  ii,  413-14.  *' AA.  88.  Feb.  ii,  167-68. 


218  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

Eligius,  bishop  of  Noyon  (c.  641-58),  and  his 
friend  Audoenus  (Dado,  Owen)  bishop  of  Rouen 
(c.  641-84),  together  with  other  Catholic  men, 
successfully  urged  upon  Clovis  II  and  the  noble- 
men of  his  kingdom  the  necessity  of  suppressing 
"  this  mortal  disease."  '*^  With  their  assistance, 
Clovis'  widow.  Queen  Bathilde,  who  assumed  the 
regency  in  656,  was  also  enabled  to  repress  simony 
with  greater  firmness.^'*  One  important  result  of 
the  influence  of  the  two  bishops  on  Clovis  II  was 
the  convocation  of  a  council  during  his  reign  for 
the  extirpation  of  the  abuse.  While  the  time  and 
place  of  this  synod  are  not  definitely  known,  it  is 
very  probable  that  the  one  held  at  Chalon-sur- 
Saone  about  648  was  the  partial  result  of 
the  efforts  of  Eligius  and  Audoenus. ^^  The 
Fathers  assembled  at  Chalon,  mindful  of  the  de- 
velopment which  had  taken  place  in  the  hierar- 
chical organization  of  the  Church  were  not  content 
with  censuring  the  venal  acquisition  of  the  episco- 
pal office.  It  was  explicitly  stated  that  venality 
should  also  be  absent  from  the  ordination  to  the 
priesthood  and  diaconate,  as  well  as  from  the  nomi- 
nation to  an  abbey.^®  The  council  held  some  time 
previously,  presumably  at  Bonneuil,  had  already 

^  Vita  Eligii.  Lib.  II,  1,  in  MOH.  88.  Rer.  Mer.  iv,  694-95. 
"  Vita  Bath,  in  MOH.  88.  Rer.  Mer.  ii,  488. 
*'See   Vacandard,   Saint   Ouen    (Paris,    1902),   222-23. 
*^MOH.  Concilia,  i,  211,  can.  16. 


FROM   THE   YEAR    604   TO   814  219 

decreed  that  money  should  play  no  part  in  the 
appointment  of  an  abbot.  ^"^  Later  enactments 
condemning,  in  a  general  way,  the  practice  of 
simony  in  the  acquiring  of  ecclesiastical  dignities, 
like  the  one  issued  by  the  council  of  Verneuil 
(July  11,  755),"*^  may  be  said  to  include  the 
condemnation  of  venal  abbatial  succession. 

Another  regulation,  directly  referring  to  monas- 
tic life,  was  made  in  favor  of  those  who  wished 
to  join  a  religious  community.  It  forbade  any 
abbot  to  require  the  payment  of  a  fee  from  postu- 
lants for  admission  to  his  monastery.  This  pro- 
hibition, which  is  contained  in  the  "  Duplex  Lega- 
tionis  Edictum  "  of  the  year  789,"*^  was  repeated 
by  the  council  of  Frankfort,  794.  This  council 
added  that  the  Benedictine  rule,  according  to 
which  admission  was  free,  should  be  observed  in 
this  regard.  ^° 

The  sharp  competition  which  existed  towards 
the  end  of  the  period  for  the  appointment  to 
churches  owned  by  private  individuals  was  re- 
acted against  in  the  following  manner :  1.  Laymen 
were  prohibited  from  exacting  payment  from 
clerics    to  whom    they  had    given    charge  of    a 

"  MGH.  vol.  cit.   195,  can.   11. 

*^MGH.   Capitularia,  i,  37,  c.  24;   see  also  ibid.  55,  ec. 
21,  22;    102,  c.  8;    399,  c.  20. 
*'  MOH.  Capitul.  i,  63,  c.  15. 
^MQU.  Concilia,  II,  I,  168. 


220  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

church;  ^^  at  least  they  were  not  to  make  any 
unjust  demands  upon  them  for  remuneration. °^ 
2.  Deposition  was  pronounced  against  the  priest 
who  obtained  a  church  for  a  price, ^^  especially 
if,  in  so  doing,  he  ousted  another  legitimately 
appointed  priest  from  his  position. ^^  3.  Clerics 
and  laymen  were  forbidden  to  give  any  priest  a 
church  without  the  permission  and  consent  of  the 
bishop.^^ 

To  prevent  the  pastoral  visitations  of  bishops 
from  degenerating  into  tyrannically  predatory 
raids,  the  council  of  Chalon-sur-Saone  (813), 
following  in  the  wake  of  the  capitulary  of  Man- 
tua, severely  condemned  episcopal  exactions  in- 
dulged in  on  such  occasions.  Bishops,  it  stipu- 
lated, were  not  to  extort  stipends  as  due  them  in 
rigorous  justice.  If  at  times  the  needs  of  their 
ministry  compelled  them  to  accept  a  material  com- 
pensation, they  were  to  use  the  utmost  discretion  ^^ 
so  as  to  avoid  scandal  and  molestation.  Instruc- 
tions of  a  similar  nature  were  issued  by  the  same 

^1  Council  of  Aries  (813),  MGH.  Cone.  II,  I,  251,  can.  5; 
Capitulary  of  Charlemagne  containing  extracts  of  the  coun- 
cils held  in  813,  ibid.  295,  c.  3;  see  also  299,  c.  14,  and 
Mansi,  xii,  384. 

'^Council  of  Mainz    (813),  MGH.  Cone.  II,  i,  268,  c.  30. 

'^'Council  of  Rheinis    (813),  ibid.  255,  c.  21. 

"Council   of   Tours    (813),   ibid.   288,   c.    15. 

"^Ibid.  288,  c.   15  and  299,  c.  14. 

'"MOH.  Concilia,  II,  i,  276,  c.  14. 


FROM  THE   YEAR    604   TO    814  221 

council  for  archdeacons,  who  were  not  to  show 
themselves  tyrannical,  covetous,  or  avaricious  in 
their  dealings  with  the  parochial  clergy.^'^ 

Among  the  regulations  appearing  in  the  capitu- 
laries of  Charlemagne,  there  is  one  which  aims 
more  particularly  at  the  exclusion  of  simony  from 
all  priestly  functions.  It  was  framed  by  the  clergy 
and  is  probably  a  fragment  of  the  Acts  of  the  coun- 
cil of  Aix-la-Chapelle  (802).  It  decrees  that  "  no 
priest  shall  presume  to  sell  the  sacred  office,  the 
sacrament  of  baptism  or  any  other  spiritual  gift 
for  a  temporal  price.  "^^  To  this  the  council  of 
Mainz  (813)  added  that  payment  should  not  be 
made  by  the  priests  for  the  balsam  blessed  for 
holy  chrism,  nor  should  they  defray  the  expenses 
incurred  for  the  acquisition  of  church  lights.  ^^ 
The  synod  thus  exhibited  its  anxiety  to  banish 
from  the  Church  the  slightest  appearance  of 
simony.  The  existence  and  manifestation  of  such 
a  disposition  must  undoubtedly  be  largely  attri- 
buted to  the  unrelenting  efforts  of  Charlemagne 
in  favor  of  ecclesiastical  reform. 

In  Spain  the  councils  maintained  and  completed 
the  already  existing  anti-simoniacal  legislation. 
Persons  guilty  of  this  sin  in  obtaining  or  confer- 

" Ibid.  277,  c.  15.  See  also  canon  43  (p.  282),  which  con- 
demns the  simoniacal  ordinations  performed  by  certain 
"  Scoti." 

^MGH.   Capit.  I,    106-107,  c.    12. 

^'MGH.  Concilia,  II,  i,  277,  c.  16;  see  also  c.  17. 


222  A   HISTORY   OF   SIMONY 

ring  the  episcopate  were  punished  by  the  fourth 
council  of  Toledo  (633)  with  the  loss  of  their 
dignity. ^^  The  sixth  council  of  Toledo  (638) 
pronounced  the  unusual  penalty  of  confiscation 
against  simoniacal  bishops.®^  Another  synod, 
held  in  the  same  city  some  years  later  (653), 
threatened  offenders  with  excommunication  and 
forcible  seclusion  in  a  monastery.®^  Episcopal 
candidates  were  subsequently  required  to  take  an 
oath  attesting  the  regularity  of  their  election,  and 
future  simoniacal  delinquencies  were  to  be  expiated 
by  penance  of  two  years  in  exile. ^^  Finally,  the 
council  of  Braga  (6Y5)  censured  the  practice  of 
promising  payment  before  ordination  and  of  re- 
deeming the  promise  after  the  reception  of  the 
sacred  dignity. ^^ 

The  Spanish  laws  insisted  on  the  necessity  of 
not  receiving  any  price  for  the  administration 
of  baptism  or  the  distribution  of  holy  chrism.  Ac- 
cording to  the  synod  of  Emerita  (666),  the  person 
commissioned  by  the  bishop  to  distribute  the  holy 
chrism  among  the  priests  shall  not  presume  to 
take  or  demand  any  compensation.  In  a  similar 
manner,  those  who  administer  baptism  to  in- 
fants shall  under  no  circumstances  accept  any- 
thing from  the  parents,  except  it  be  spontaneously 

™Mansi,  x,  624-25,  c.  19,  '^  Ibid.  X,  664,  c.  4. 

"'Ibid.  X,  1216,  c.  3. 

^  Eleventh  synod  of  Toledo  ( 675 ) ,  Mansi,  xi,  143,  c.  9. 
"Mansi,  xi,  158-59,  c.  8. 


FROM   THE   YEAR    604   TO    814  223 

offered.^^  The  eleventh  synod  of  Toledo  (675) 
entered  into  more  details.  I^o  ecclesiastic  was  to 
receive  any  emolument  not  even  a  spontaneously 
proffered  gift  for  baptism,  confirmation,  holy 
chrism  or  orders.  A  two  months'  excommunica- 
tion was  to  be  incurred  by  the  bishop  tolerating  a 
contrary  practice.  Should  the  offence  be  committed 
without  the  bishop's  knowledge,  the  recipient  of 
the  reward  was,  if  a  priest,  to  be  excommunicated 
for  three  months,  if  a  deacon,  for  four  months. 
The  subdeacon  and  inferior  clerics  were  to  receive 
the  appropriate  corporal  castigation  and  also  incur 
excommunication.^^ 

Among  the  Anglo-Saxons  also,  the  church 
authorities  began  to  take  cognizance  of  the  evil 
in  their  councils  during  this  period.  But  they 
issued  few  prohibitions  and  these  were  identical 
with  those  in  existence  in  other  countries.^'^ 
Worthy  of  special  mention  is  the  stirring  appeal 
to  avoid  simony,  which  Alcuin  addressed  to  the 
people  of  the  archdiocese  of  York  in  795.  The 
church  of  York  had  been  till  then  free  from  all 
such  stain,  and  the  great  Englishman  wished  the 
local  population  to  be  faithful  to  this  tradition  in 
the  forthcoming  election  of  a  new  archbishop.^^ 

^Ihid.  XI,  81,  c.  9.  ''Ibid,  xi,  142-43,  cc.  8  and  9. 

"Council  of  Cloveshoe  (747),  Haddan  and  Stubbs, 
Councils  and  Ecclesiastical  Documents  relating  to  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland,  ni,  365,  c.  9;  Report  of  Legatine 
Synods,  ibid.  Iii,  449. 

''MGn.  Epp.  IV,  92. 


CHAPTEK  X 

SIMONY   IN  THE   EAST   FROM   604   TO   814 

John  Eleemosynarius  and  simony  —  Prohibitions  of  simony 
by  the  council  in  Trullo  —  The  seventh  ecumenical 
council  and  episcopal  appointments  —  Controversy  re- 
garding its  fifth  canon  —  Admission  to  monasteries  — 
The  patriarch  Tarasius  and  his  controversy  with  the 
monks  of  Constantinople  —  Conclusion. 

The  documents  in  which  we  have  to  seek  the 
history  of  the  churches  of  the  East  contain  but 
scanty  information  regarding  traffic  in  spiritual 
things.  It  was  probably  due  to  the  vehement  dis- 
cussions on  doctrinal  matters  that  the  compara- 
tively unimportant  subject  of  simony  was  kept 
in  the  background.  Moreover,  the  Eastern  church 
was  becoming  more  and  more  dependent  on  the 
state.  As  the  people  did  not  consider  this  con- 
dition of  affairs  an  unnatural  arrangement,  it  is 
not  surprising  that  they  paid  but  little  attention 
to  the  instances  in  which,  through  favor,  patronage 
or  money,  the  civil  power  threw  in  the  weight  of 
its  influence  in  favor  of  special  candidates.  That 
simony  existed  in  the  East  must  be  admitted,  even 
though  the  documents  speak  almost  exclusively  of 
resistance  to  the  evil. 

The  church  of  Alexandria  first   demands  our 

224 


FROM   THE   YEAR   G04   TO   814  225 

attention.  John  V,  siirnamed  Eleemosynarius, 
was  Catholic  patriarch  of  the  city  from  609  to 
616,  a  time  when  the  needs  of  the  Christian  popu- 
lation almost  drained  the  resources  of  the  church 
treasury  of  Alexandria.  John  was  ever  ready  to 
help  the  poor  of  both  his  own  and  other  churches. 
But  his  desire  to  relieve  the  wants  of  his  fellow- 
men  did  not  make  him  overlook  the  necessity  of 
deriving  no  profit  from  barter  in  sacred  things. 
Simeon  Metaphrastes  tells  us  ^  that  "  He  displayed 
a  most  ardent  zeal  to  exclude  all  earthly  profit 
from  ordinations."  This  general  assertion  is  illus- 
trated by  an  incident  narrated  in  the  Life  of  John 
by  Leontius,  bishop  of  ]^eapolis,  in  Cyprus.  The 
original  of  the  work  is  lost,  but  a  Latin  translation 
by  the  Roman  chronicler,  Anastasius,  is  still  pre- 
served.^ 

Owing  to  the  invasion  of  Palestine  and  Syria 
by  the  Persians  (a.  d.  614)  and  the  ravages  which 
they  perpetrated,  numerous  Christians  of  these 
countries  were  forced  to  flee  and  took  refuge  in 
Egypt.  So  great  was  the  liberality  of  the  patri- 
arch in  relieving  their  destitution  that  the  rich 
treasury  of  the  church  was  soon  exhausted. 
Unfortunately,  at  this  very  time  a  deficiency  in 

^Vita  Johan.  in  PG.  114,  900;  also  in  AA.  88.  Jan.  in, 
131. 

*  It  is  printed  in  the  Acta  Sanctorum  Boll.  Jan.  ni,  108- 
131;   also  in  Migne,  PL.  73,  341-383. 

15 


226  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

the  rise  of  the  Kile  caused  the  distress  to  assume 
a  general  character,  and  famine  soon  set  in  at 
Alexandria.  The  patriarch  now  borrowed  until 
no  one  was  willing  to  make  any  further  loans. 
Even  then  the  evil  had  not  yet  abated;  fugitives 
were  still  coming  in.  At  this  juncture,  a  wealthy 
citizen,  Cosmas,  sent  John  a  communication  which 
contained  a  very  tempting  offer.  Cosmas  having 
been  married  a  second  time  was  thus  debarred  by 
the  canons  from  the  reception  of  holy  orders.  In 
his  message  he  applied  for  admission  to  the  ecclesi- 
astical state,  declaring  his  readiness  to  give  to 
Christ,  through  his  Lordship,  200,000  bushels  of 
wheat  and  180  pounds  of  gold  on  condition  that 
he  would  be  raised  to  the  diaconate.  The  patri- 
arch summoned  Cosmas,  who  came  with  the  joyful 
anticipation  that  his  request  had  been  granted. 
He  was  to  be  disappointed  in  his  expectation. 
In  the  private  interview  which  followed,  John  ad- 
mitted that  the  offer  was  most  generous  and  very 
timely,  but  that  it  could  not  be  accepted.  "  As  to 
my  needy  brethren  and  the  holy  church,"  he  con- 
tinued, "  God,  who  supported  them  before  either 
of  us  was  born,  will  also  now  support  them,  pro- 
vided we  live  conformably  to  his  teachings.  He 
who  multiplied  the  five  loaves  of  bread,  can  also 
bless  and  multiply  the  ten  measures  of  corn  in 
my  granary.  Wherefore  I  repeat  to  you  the  words 
of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles :  "  Thou  hast  no  part 


FROM   THE   YEAH   G04  TO   814  227 

nor  lot  in  this  matter."  Hardly  had  the  would-be 
cleric  been  dismissed  when  news  was  brought  that 
two  large  vessels  belonging  to  the  church  had  re- 
turned from  Sicily  with  a  cargo  of  wheat.  The 
patriarch  on  receiving  this  intelligence  fell  on  his 
knees  and  thanked  God  that  he  had  not  been  per- 
mitted to  sell  His  grace  for  money.  ^ 

In  speaking  of  the  second  canon  of  the  council 
of  Chalcedon,  we  mentioned  the  fact  that  the 
synod  in  Trullo  (692)  renewed  in  an  abridged 
form  the  inhibitions  against  simony  which  had 
been  formulated  in  451.'*  The  Trullan  synod  also 
issued  the  following  canon  relative  to  the  free  dis- 
tribution of  communion: 

"  No  one,  be  he  bishop,  priest,  or  deacon,  distribu- 
ting holy  communion,  shall  exact  from  the  commu- 
nicant for  his  participation  in  the  sacrament  either 
money  or  any  other  compensation.  For  grace  is  not 
venal,  and  we  do  not  impart  the  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit  for  a  pecuniary  consideration;  but  to  worthy 
persons  we  distribute  it  in  all  sincerity.  If  any  one 
of  those  who  are  on  the  roll  of  the  clergy  is  found 
to  exact  compensation  from  the  person  to  whom  he 
distributes  holy  communion,  he  shall  be  deposed  as  an 
imitator  of  the  error  and  crime  of  Simon  Magus."  ^ 

^  AA.   88.   I.  c.   116;    see  Neale,   Holy  Eastern  Chwrch, 
Alex.   II,   52-54. 

*  Canon  22  of  Trullo,  Mansi,  xi,  953. 
'^  Canon  23,  Mansi,  I.  c. 


228  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

With  the  seventh  ecumenical  council  (second  of 
]^ice),  787,  a  campaign,  as  it  were,  opens  against 
simony  in  the  Eastern  church.  The  assembled 
bishops  first  reminded  the  aspirants  to  the  ej^iscopal 
office  of  the  doctrine  proclaimed  at  an  early  date, 
that  this  dignity  was  not  to  be  obtained  from  the 
civil  power,  but  that  the  appointment  to  it  lay 
in  the  hands  of  the  ecclesiastical  authority.^  They 
then  denounced  those  bishops  who,  more  intent 
upon  acquiring  wealth  than  careful  of  the  spiritual 
welfare  of  their  flock,  imposed  ecclesiastical  penal- 
ties upon  their  clergy  or  even  closed  churches  to 
worship,  for  no  other  reason  than  the  sake  of 
filthy  lucre. ''^ 

The  fifth  canon  of  the  council  speaks  still  more 
clearly  of  simony.  Owing  to  the  difficulty  which 
its  interpretation  presents,  it  is  necessary  to  quote 
the  document  in  full  before  proceeding  to  dis- 
cuss it: 

"  It  is  a  sin  unto  death  when  men  incorrigibly 
continue  in  their  sin,  but  they  sin  more  deeply,  who 
proudly  lifting  themselves  up  oppose  piety  and  sin- 
cerity, accounting  mammon  of  more  worth  than 
obedience  to  God,  and  caring  nothing  for  his 
canonical   precepts.     The    Lord    God   is   not   found 

*  Canon  3,  Mansi,  xiii,  420-21. 

^  Canon  4,  ibid.  421.  See  Van  Espen,  Opera,  in,  431; 
the  canon  has  been  incorporated  in  the  Corp.  Jur.  Can.  c.  64, 
Causa  XVI,  Q.  1, 


FROM   THE   YEAR   G04   TO    814  229 

among  such,  unless,  perchance,  having  been  humbled 
by  their  own  fall,  they  return  to  a  sober  mind.  It 
behoves  them  the  rather  to  turn  to  God  with  a  con- 
trite heart  and  to  pray  for  forgiveness  and  pardon 
of  so  grave  a  sin,  and  no  longer  to  boast  in  an  unholy 
gift.  For  the  Lord  is  nigh  unto  them  that  are  of 
a  contrite  heart.  With  regard,  therefore,  to  those 
who  pride  themselves  that  because  of  their  benefac- 
tions of  gold  they  were  ordained  in  the  Church,  and 
resting  confidently  in  this  evil  custom  (so  alien  from 
God  and  inconsistent  with  the  whole  priesthood), 
with  a  proud  look  and  open  mouth  vilify  with 
abusive  words  those  who  on  account  of  the  strictness 
of  their  life  were  chosen  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
have  been  ordained  without  any  gift  of  money,  we 
decree  in  the  first  place  that  they  take  the  lowest 
place  in  their  order;  but  if  they  do  not  amend  let 
them  be  subjected  to  a  fine.  But  if  it  appear  that 
any  one  has  done  this  (i.  e.,  given  money),  at  any 
time  as  a  price  for  ordination,  let  him  be  dealt  with 
according  to  the  Apostolic  Canon  which  says :  '  If 
a  bishop  has  obtained  possession  of  his  dignity  by 
means  of  money  (the  same  rule  applies  also  to  a 
presbyter  or  deacon)  let  him  be  deposed  and  also  the 
one  who  ordained  him,  and  let  him  also  be  altogether 
cut  off  from  communion,  even  as  Simon  Magus  was 
by  me  Peter.'  To  the  same  effect  is  the  second 
canon  of  our  holy  fathers  of  Chalcedon,  which  says: 
If  any  bishop  gives  ordination  in  return  for  money, 
and  puts  up  for  sale  that  which  cannot  be  sold,  and 
ordains  for  money  a  bishop  or  chorepiscopus,  or 
presbyter,  or  deacon,  or  any  other  of  those  who  are 


230  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

reckoned  among  the  clergy;  or  who  for  money  shall 
appoint  anyone  to  the  office  of  oeconomus,  advocate, 
or  paramonarins ;  or,  in  a  word,  who  hath  done 
anything  else  contrary  to  the  canon,  for  the  sake  of 
filthy  lucre — he  who  hath  imdertaken  to  do  anything 
of  this  sort,  having  been  convicted,  shall  be  in  danger 
of  losing  his  degree.  And  he  who  has  been  ordained 
shall  derive  no  advantage  from  the  ordination  or 
promotion  thus  negotiated;  but  let  him  remain  a 
stranger  to  the  dignity  and  responsibility  which  he 
attained  by  means  of  money.  And  if  any  one  shall 
appear  to  have  acted  as  a  go-between  in  so  shameful 
and  godless  a  traffic,  he  also,  if  he  be  a  cleric,  shall 
be  removed  from  his  degree;  if  he  be  a  layman  or 
a  monk,  let  him  be  excommunicated."  ® 

Two  parts  may  be  distinguished  in  this  canon. 
The  first  part  speaks  of  a  class  of  men  who  prided 
themselves  on  their  donations,  to  which  thej  owed 
in  some  manner  their  ecclesiastical  positions.  In 
the  second  part  the  council  clearly  and  undeniably 
speaks  of  simoniacal  ordinations.  The  meaning 
of  the  first  section  of  the  canon  is  not  so  clear. 
Hefele  ^  cites  Zonaras,  Balsamon,  Christianus 
Lupus  and  Van  Espen  as  of  the  opinion  that  it 
does  not  refer  to  simony.  He  himself  endorses 
this  view.     The  combination  of  such  great  and 

'Mansi,  xiii,  421-26;  the  translation  is  that  of  Percival 
in  vol.  XIV  of  Schaff-Waee's  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers, 
558-59. 

*  Conciliengesch.   in,   476-477. 


FROM   THE   YEAR   G04   TO   814  231 

numerous  authorities  and  the  silence  about  a  diver- 
gent interpretation  might  easily  lead  us  to  suppose 
that  unanimity  exists  in  the  understanding  of  the 
passage.  But  such  is  not  the  case.  Among  the 
Greek  commentators,  Aristenus  does  not  share  the 
opinion  of  the  afore-cited  scholars.  ^°  Moreover, 
Hefele  erroneously  mentions  Van  Espen  among 
the  writers  who  hold  the  opinion  which  he  exposes. 
The  learned  Louvain  commentator  rather  favors  ^^ 
the  interpretation  of  Aristenus,  and  in  this  he 
agrees  with  Thomassin.^^  It  may  be  said,  there- 
fore, that  there  are  two  different  ways  of  under- 
standing the  first  part  of  the  canon. 

Balsamon,^^  Zonaras,^'*  Christianus  Lupus  ^^ 
and  Hefele  ^^  maintain  that  the  proud  ecclesi- 
astics of  whom  the  council  speaks  had  made  dona- 
tions to  the  Church  without  any  view  to  obtaining 
spiritual  positions  for  their  generosity.  The 
Church,  in  grateful  recognition  of  their  benefac- 
tions, raised  the  donors  to  the  ecclesiastical  state. 
There  was  no  guilt  of  simony  whatever  on  either 
side;  but  the  ecclesiastics  who  had  thus  been  re- 
warded by  the  Church  looked  down  with  manifest 

^"PO.  137,  905. 

"  Van  Espen,  Scripta  Omnia,  irr,  432-33. 

"  Vetus  et  Nova  Discip,  torn.  Vll,  465. 

"PG.   137,  901-904. 

"76td.    137,   904-905. 

^  Synod.  Gen.  et  Prov.  Deer  eta,  Pars,  iida,  1118. 

"i.  c. 


232  A  HISTORY  OF   SIMONY 

contempt  upon  those  of  their  colleagues  who  were 
unable  to  make  any  such  endowments.  And  it  is 
this  conduct,  they  say,  that  is  criticised  in  the 
canon. 

To  this  interpretation  Aristenus,  Van  Espen 
and  Thomassin  take  exception,  and  it  would  seem 
rightly  so.  It  being  universally  admitted  that  in 
the  second  part  of  the  canon  there  is  question  of 
exchanging  the  spiritual  for  the  temporal ;  it  is 
more  logical  to  apply  a  similar  meaning  to  the  first 
part  and  understand  that  the  donations  were  made 
to  obtain  ecclesiastical  positions.  The  citation 
of  the  scriptural  text  with  which  the  canon  opens : 
"  It  is  a  sin  unto  death,"  etc.,  would  seem  to  apply 
rather  to  commission  of  sin  in  making  the 
donations  themselves  than  in  glorying  in  an 
action  that,  after  all,  was  worthy  of  commenda- 
tion. Morever,  the  expression  "  unlawful  gift " 
(aOea-fico  Socret)  almost  forces  us  to  admit  the 
idea  of  traffic.  The  gift  was  unlawful  because 
it  was  made  to  obtain  an  ecclesiastical  appoint- 
ment. On  the  contrary,  a  donation  in  favor  of 
a  church  is  not  an  unlawful  gift,  but  a  very  com- 
mendable act  of  generosity  and  religion.  To  say 
with  Balsamon  that  the  gift  becomes  unlawful 
through  the  subsequent  pride  of  the  giver  is 
to  have  recourse  to  a  forced  and  unnecessary 
metaphor. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  canon  is  not  very  in- 


FROM   THE   YEAR   604   TO   814  233 

telligible  if  both  parts  of  it  relate  to  simoniacal 
ordinations.  It  would  amount  to  saying  that  the 
bishops  present  at  Nice  decreed  two  different 
penalties  for  one  and  the  same  offence  in  one  and 
the  same  canon.  The  first  part,  therefore,  should 
be  referred,  it  would  seem,  to  persons  who  had 
unlawfully  acquired  an  ecclesiastical  standing  but 
not  ordination,  while  the  remainder  of  the  docu- 
ment applies  to  ecclesiastics  who  had  bought  ordi- 
nation. The  original  Greek  text  itself  suggests 
this  distinction,  because  the  usual  word  for  ordi- 
nation, x^''P^'^°^^^  (imposition  of  hands),  does  not 
appear  in  the  first  part  of  the  canon.  The  penalty 
varies  according  to  the  nature  of  the  offence:  men 
who  had  bought  an  ecclesiastical  position  but  not 
ordination  are  punished  with  removal  to  last  place 
and,  if  necessary,  a  fine ;  deposition  is  inflicted  on 
those  who  had  purchased  ordination  itself. 

In  the  nineteenth  canon  the  council  completes 
its  legislation  on  simony  by  decreeing  punishment, 
as  was  done  in  the  West,  against  the  exaction  of 
gifts  for  admission  to  a  monastery.  The  canon 
reads : 

"  The  abomination  of  filthy  lucre  has  made  such 
inroads  among  the  rulers  of  the  churches,  that  certain 
of  those  who  call  themselves  religious  men  and 
women,  forgetting  the  commandments  of  the  Lord 
have  been  altogether  led  astray,  and  for  the  sake  of 
money  have  received  those  presenting  themselves  for 


234  A  HISTORY  OF  SIMONY 

the  sacerdotal  order  and  the  monastic  life.  And 
hence  the  first  step  of  those  so  received  being  un- 
lawful, the  whole  proceeding  is  rendered  null,  as 
says  Basil  the  Great.  For  it  is  not  possible  that  God 
should  be  served  by  means  of  mammon.  If  there- 
fore, anyone  is  found  doing  anything  of  this  kind, 
if  he  be  a  bishop  or  hegumenos,  or  one  of  the  priest- 
hood, either  let  him  cease  to  do  so  any  longer  or 
else  let  him  be  deposed,  according  to  the  second 
canon  of  the  Holy  Coimcil  of  Chalcedon.  If  the 
offender  be  an  abbess,  let  her  be  sent  away  from  her 
monastery,  and  placed  in  another  in  a  subordinate 
position.  In  like  manner  is  a  hegumenos  to  be  dealt 
with,  who  has  not  the  ordination  of  a  presbyter. 
With  regard  to  what  has  been  given  by  parents  as 
a  dowry  for  their  children,  or  which  persons  them- 
selves have  contributed  out  of  their  own  property, 
with  the  declaration  that  such  gifts  were  made  to 
God,  we  have  decreed,  that  whether  the  persons  in 
whose  behalf  the  gifts  were  made,  continue  to  live 
in  the  monastery  or  not,  the  gifts  are  to  remain  with 
the  monastery  in  accordance  with  their  first  deter- 
mination; unless  indeed  there  be  ground  for  com- 
plaint against  the  superior."  ^^ 

In  commenting  on  this  canon,  Balsamon  re- 
marks that  an  attempt  v^as  made  to  limit  its 
application  to  the  monks  who  led  a  common  life. 
Those  who  lived  in  separately  constructed  cells, 

"Mansi,  xni,  435-38;    Hefele,  m,  481;    the  translation 
is  Percival's,  op.  cit,  567. 


FROM   THE   YEAR   604   TO   814  235 

it  was  claimed,  were  not  subject  to  its  rulings. 
In  answer  to  this  contention,  the  same  author 
observes  that  the  law  applies  to  all  monks,  because 
it  makes  no  distinction  between  class  and  class.  ^^ 
The  council  had  hardly  concluded  its  sessions 
when  a  sharp  controversy  arose  between  the  patri- 
arch of  Constantinople,  Tarasius,  and  a  large 
number  of  Eastern  monks.  The  monks,  though 
opposed  to  iconoclasm  like  Tarasius,  neverthe- 
less bitterly  denounced  his  policy,  accusing 
him  of  too  great  leniency  in  reinstating  in  their 
former  positions  bishops  who  had  opposed  the 
veneration  of  images  or  were  guilty  of  simony. 
Sabas  and  Theoctistus  were  the  two  leaders  of  the 
opposition  party.  The  patriarch  was  charged 
with  having  permitted  simony  in  ordination,  ^^ 
and  with  having  restored  to  their  offices  after  but 
one  year's  penance  persons  who  had  ordained  or 
been  ordained  in  a  simoniacal  manner.^"  Tara- 
sius defended  himself  in  a  letter  to  the  abbot  John, 
in  which  he  relates  that,  at  the  council  which  had 
just  been  held,  numerous  monks  entered  a  com- 
plaint to  the  effect  that  money  played  a  part  in 
the  consecration  of  most  Eastern  bishops.  The 
contents   of   the   complaint,    he   asserts,   were   no 

"Balsamon,  PG.  137,  981. 

"Theod.  Stud.  Epp.  Lib.  i,  53,  PO.  99,  1104-1105. 
="Theod.  Stud.  Epp.  Lib.  i,  38,  PQ.  99,  1044;  and  Lib.  i, 
Ep.  53,  iUd.  1104. 


236  A   HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

revelation  to  him  as  he  was  aware  of  the  exist- 
ence of  this  state  of  things.  But  it  is  not  true 
that  he  holds  communion  with  such  men,  who  are 
priests  only  in  name.  They  may,  of  course,  plead 
that  they  have  done  penance  and  obtained  forgive- 
ness from  God.  Not  being  a  ISTovatian,  and 
knowing  of  instances  where  others  who  were 
guilty  of  ecclesiastical  offences  had  obtained  well- 
merited  pardon,  Tarasius  does  not  exclude  such 
offenders  from  penance;  but  even  their  penance 
does  not  entitle  them  to  reinstatement  in  their 
previous  functions,  and  he  does  not  reinstate 
them,  because  the  apostle  Paul  desires  an  irre- 
proachable bishop. ^^ 

It  was  probably  about  this  time  that  Tarasius 
wrote  his  letter  to  Pope  Hadrian,  which,  though 
apparently  composed  in  defence  of  his  conduct,  is 
in  reality  the  first  anti-simoniacal  treatise  which 
we  possess. ^^  This  treatise  contains  a  refutation 
of  simony  drawn  from  the  Scriptures,  the  Fathers 
and  the  councils,  and  has  found  a  place  in  both 
eastern  and  western  collections  of  ecclesiastical 
law.  It  is  not  an  original  work,  but  a  reproduc- 
tion of  documents  issued  anterior  to  the  time  of 
Tarasius.  Thus  it  cites  the  thirtieth  canon  of  the 
Apostles,   the    second    canon    of    Chalcedon,  the 

"  The  letter  is  given  in  Migne,  PO.  98,  1452-1460,  and  in 
Mansi,  xin,  471-479. 
=="  Mansi,  xiil,  461-472. 


FROM   THE   YEAR   604  TO   814  237 

decree  of  Gennadius  and  other  enactments  which 
have  already  been  studied  in  this  work:  a  cir- 
cumstance which  will  dispense  us  from  giving  a 
detailed  account  of  it  here. 

The  monks,  however,  were  not  content  with 
these  protestations  of  innocence.  They  contended 
that,  though  Tarasius  had  at  first  refused  to  re- 
admit simoniacal  bishops  to  their  functions  after 
one  year's  penance,  he  had  subsequently  yielded 
to  the  insistent  pleading  of  the  empress  in  their 
behalf. ^^  The  opposition  was  extended  to  the 
seventh  general  council,  which  seemed  in  its  first 
session  to  approve  Tarasius'  policy.-^  The  ecu- 
menical character  of  this  council  was  denied, 
because  it  was  not  representative  of  the  universal 
church  and  had  not  been  approved  by  Rome.  The 
papal  legates,  it  was  asserted,  had  not  been  sent 
to  the  East  to  attend  the  council,  and  Theodore 
of  Studium  went  so  far  as  to  maintain  that,  on 
their  return  to  Rome,  they  had  been  deposed  by 
the  pope  for  having  transgressed  their  power.^^ 
But  while  the  other  monks  of  the  opposition  party 
had  seceded  from  the  communion  of  Tarasius,  the 
same  Theodore  had  continued  in  ecclesiastical  re- 
lations with  him  and  had  even  received  priestly 
ordination  at  his  hands.     On  being  asked  to  ex- 

^Theod.  stud.  PG.   99,  1044. 
="Mansi,  xn,  1022  seqq. 
^Theod.  Stud.  PG.   99,  1044-45. 


238  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

plain  this  apparent  contradiction  between  his 
words  and  his  acts,  the  celebrated  monk  admitted 
that  Tarasius  was  orthodox  and  had  been  con- 
secrated without  simony;  also  that  he  had  no  cer- 
tain proof  of  the  charges  brought  against  the 
patriarch  and  which  the  latter  denied.  Moreover, 
he  was  at  the  time  under  religious  obedience,  and 
Tarasius  was  recognized  by  other  churches  and 
by  the  Roman  apocrisiarii.^® 

It  is  difficult  to  state  just  how  much,  if  any, 
foundation  there  was  for  the  accusations  brought 
against  Tarasius.  At  a  later  date  Theodore  of 
Studium  passed  a  less  severe  judgment  on  him 
and  admitted  the  ecumenical  character  of  the 
second  council  of  ISTice.^'^  The  biographer  of 
Tarasius  speaks  with  complacency  of  the  vigorous 
opposition  displayed  by  his  hero  to  the  simoniacal 
gy^l  28  Yet  it  is  possible  that  the  admittedly 
meek  character  and  dispositions  of  the  patriarch 
led  him  to  grant  too  easy  a  pardon  on  some  occa- 
sions, especially  when  pressure  was  brought  to 
bear  upon  him  by  the  imperial  court.^® 

It  is  with  this  treatment  of  events  at  Constan- 
tinople in  the  time  of  Tarasius  that  we  shall  con- 

"^PG.  99,  1045,  1101-1108. 

"Theod.   Stud.  Epp.   Lib.   II,   127,   PG.   99,   1412. 

^^  AA.  88.  Feb.  Ill,  587;  cfr.  Baronius,  Ad  ann.  787,  n.  60. 

^  On  Tarasius  and  this  controversy  with  the  monks,  see 
Hergenrother,  Photius,  I,  250-52;  Hefele,  Conciliengesch.  ni, 
484-85. 


FROM   THE    YEAR   604  TO   814  239 

elude  our  study  of  simony  in  the  first  eight  cen- 
turies of  the  Christian  era.  We  have  been  obliged 
to  record  many  deplorable  transgressions,  many 
shameful  transactions.  That  some  of  these  should 
have  existed  does  not  cause  much  surprise  to  the 
careful  and  impartial  student  of  history.  A 
human  society  of  the  vast  proportions  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  is  never  without  some  minor  evils. 
It  was  not  likely  that  all  the  newly-made  converts 
from  corrupt  Roman  paganism  or  German  bar- 
barism would  fully  grasp  and  live  up  to  all  the 
high  moral  principles  of  their  new  faith  immedi- 
ately after  their  conversion.  The  transformation 
of  the  individual,  and  much  more  the  civilization 
of  nations,  demands  time,  also  patient  and  con- 
tinuous efforts.  The  Church  necessarily  suffered 
from  the  conflict,  disorder  and  confusion,  which 
prevailed  during,  and  immediately  after,  the 
period  of  the  invasion  of  the  Barbarians,  l^ot 
only  did  she  suffer  in  things  material;  but  her 
nature,  her  powers,  her  sacraments  were  misunder- 
stood. Men  arose  and  became  candidates  for 
bishoprics  who  did  not  sufficiently  under- 
stand the  obligations  even  of  the  ordinary 
Christian  life.  The  frequent  and  persistent 
occurrence  of  the  sin  of  simony  finds  a  partial 
explanation  in  these  ecclesiastico-political  and 
social  conditions.  But  if  the  commission  of  the 
sin  was  persistent,  far  more  persistent  were  the 


240  A    HISTORY    OF    SIMONY 

vigilant  efforts  of  the  Church  to  suppress  it. 
Prohibition  after  prohibition  was  issued  to  up- 
root this  "  detestable  crime,  this  species  of  heresy." 
Councils,  both  general  and  provincial,  insisted 
upon  integrity  among  the  sacred  ministers  and 
other  officials  connected  with  the  administration 
of  church  affairs.  Ecclesiastical  and  civil  rulers 
enacted  laws  forbidding,  under  the  severest  penal- 
ties, every  sort  of  traffic  in  sacred  things.  Dis- 
tinguished churchmen  called  attention  to  the 
gravity  of  the  offence,  l^ot  only  was  the  sin  con- 
demned; its  very  appearance  was  to  be  banished 
from  the  sanctuary. 

In  spite  of  this  decidedly  pronounced  opposition, 
the  time  of  Charlemagne  did  not  mark  the  end 
of  the  simoniacal  evil.  It  has  been  seen  how  the 
relations  between  the  ecclesiastical  and  the  civil 
powers  favored,  in  a  way,  venal  abuses.  For  centu- 
ries after  Charlemagne  the  state  was  to  continue  in 
the  exercise  of  great  influence  over  church  affairs. 
At  the  same  time  the  power  of  the  bishops,  which 
was  very  considerable  during  the  period  studied,  was 
to  grow  still  greater:  the  episcopal  office  became 
more  and  more  a  civil  as  well  as  an  ecclesiastical 
position.  Some  of  the  bishops  became  compara- 
tively important  territorial  princes.  While  the 
Church  had  to  defend  her  own  interests  in  their 
appointment,  the  state  could  not  be  denied  all 
share    in    their    selection.     Under    such    circum- 


FROM   THE   YEAR   604   TO   814  241 

stances,  it  could  not  be  surprising  that  noble 
families  endeavored  by  lawful  and  frequently  un- 
lawful means,  by  pressure,  intimidation  and 
corruption,  to  place  their  own  members  on  the 
episcopal  throne.  Church  and  state  continued  to 
proscribe  venality  in  the  acquisition  of  ecclesi- 
astical offices;  it  was  of  no  avail.  Simony  ulti- 
mately developed  to  the  extent  of  being  one  of  the 
most  disastrous  abuses  in  the  Christian  Church. 
The  eleventh  century  became,  so  to  speak,  its 
classical  period.  But  in  that  very  century,  one 
of  the  most  calumniated,  most  hated,  and  at  the 
same  time  most  admired  of  popes,  Gregory  VII, 
resumed  on  a  grander  scale,  in  the  ever-memorable 
Investiture-Contest,  that  struggle  against  simony 
which  we  have  seen  carried  on  with  so  much  vigor 
by  his  first  namesake  in  the  Papal  Chair. 


16 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


I.     SOURCES 

Acta     Sanctoeum.      Bollandists.      Antwerp,     Paris     and 

Brussels,    1643   seqq. 
Bibliotheca     Rerum     Germanicarum.     Ed.     Jaife.     Berlin, 

1864  seqq. 
Concilia    Magna    Britanniae    et    Hiberniae.     Ed.    Wilkins. 

London,   1734. 
Corpus  Juris   Canonici.     Ed.    Friedberg.     Leipzig,    1879-81. 
Corpus   Juris   Civilis.     Ed.   Kriiger-Mommsen-Schoell-Kroll. 

Berlin,  1900-1905. 
Corpus    Scriptor.    Ecclesiast.    Latin.      Acad.    Lit.    Vindob. 

Vienna,   1866  seqq. 
Councils   and   Eccl.   Documents    relating   to   Great   Britain 

and  Ireland.    Ed.  Haddan  and  Stubbs.    Oxford,  1869-78. 
Die    griech.    christl.    Schriftsteller    der    erst,    drei    Jahrh. 

Berlin.    Akad.    der    Wissensch.     Leipzig,    1897    seqq. 
Epist.    Rom.    Pontiff.     (461-523).     Ed.    Thiel.     Braunsberg, 

1868. 
Epist.    Rom.    Pontiff,    ineditae.     Ed.    Lowenfeld.     Leipzig, 

1885. 
Gallia   Christiana.     Ed.    Sammarthanus-Piolin.     Paris   and 

Rome,    1870    seqq. 
Liber  Diurnus.     Ed.  De  Rozi&re.     Paris,  1869. 
Liber    Pontificalis.     Ed.    Duchesne.     Paris,    1886-1892. 
Mai.   Scriptorum  Veterum  Nova   Collectio.     Rome,   1838, 
Monumenta    Germaniae    Historica.     Hanover    and    Berlin, 

1826  seqq. 
Patrologiae   cursus   completus:    a)    Patrologia   Latina;    6) 

Patrologia   Graeca.     Ed.   Migne.     Paris,   1844   seqq. 
Pitra,    Juris    Ecclesiastici    Graecorum    Historia    et    Monu- 
menta.    Rome,    1864-1868. 

243 


244  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Recueil  des  Ilistoriens  des  Gaules  et  de  la  France.  Ed. 
Bouquet-Delisle.     Paris,    1869   seqq. 

Regesta  Pontiff.  Rom.  2d  ed.,  Jaffe-Lowenfeld,  etc.  Leip- 
zig,   1885-1888. 

Sacrorum  Conciliorum  Nova  et  Amplissima  Collectio.  Ed. 
Mansi,  repr.     Paris,   1901. 

Synodicon  Orientale  ou  Recueil  des  Synodes  Nestoriens. 
Ed.  Chabot.     Paris,  1902. 


II.     LATER   WRITINGS 

Annates  Juris  Pontificii,  1873,  xii,  1103-17. 
Ansillon.     De  Simonia.     Lifege,  1677. 
Aenold.     Ciisarius  von  Arelate.     Leipzig,  1894. 
Baedenhevpeb.     Patrologie,   2d  ed.     Freiburg,    1901. 
Baedenhewee-Shahan.      Patrology.      Freiburg      and      St. 

Louis,   1908. 
Baeonius-Theinee.       Annales     Ecclesiastici.       Bar-le-Duc, 

1864    seqq. 
Baery    (David).     Spiritual   Ministrations  as  an   Occasion 

of  Emolument.     Ecclesiastical  Review,  September,  1908, 

234-245. 
Bingham.     Antiquities.     Oxford,  1855. 
Blasel.     Kirchl.  Zustande  Italiens  z.  Zeit  Gregor  des  Gros- 

sen.  Archiv  f.  Katli.  Kirclienrecht,  1904,  Lxxxiv,  83-94, 

225-43. 
Beight.     Chapters  of  Early  English  Church  History.     2d 

ed.     Oxford,   1888. 
Catholic  Encyclopedia.     Ed.  Herbermann-Pace-Pallen-Sha- 

han- Wynne.     New^  York,  s.  d. 
Chevalier.     Repertoire  des  Sources  Historiques  du  Moyen 

Age.     Bio-Bibliographie.     New     ed.     Paris,     1905-1907. 

Topo-Bibliographie.     Montbeliard,    1903. 

Ceeagh.     An    Hereditary    Papacy.     Ecclesiastical    Review, 

1903,  xxviii,  41  seqq. 
De  Beoglie.     L'Eglise  et  I'Empire  Romain  au  IVe  sifecle. 

Paris,    1856-66. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  245 

DiEHL.     Etudes  sur  rAdministration  Byzantine  dans  I'Ex- 

archat    de    Ravenne     (568-751).     Paris,    1888. 

Justinian.     Paris,  1901. 

DoiZE.     Les  Elections  Episcopales  en  France  avant  les  Con- 
cordats.    Etudes,    1906.     cvii,    721-743.     cviii,    38-54, 

359-384. 
Dresdneb.     Kultur-    und   Sittengeschiehte   der   ital.   Geist- 

lichkeit  im   10  u.   11   Jahrhdt.     Breslau,   1890. 
Duchesne.     Le  Liber  Diurnus  et  les  Elections  Pontiff,  au 

Vile    si^cle.     Biblioth.    de    I'Ecole    des    Chartes,    1891, 

Lil,  5-30. 
DuDDEN.     Gregory   the    Great,   His    Place    in   History    and 

Thought.     London,  New  York  and  Bombay,  1905. 
Fehb.     Staat  u.  Kirche  im  frilnkischen  Reich  bis  auf  Karl 

den  Grossen.     Vienna,   1869. 
Feeearis.     Bibliotheca     Canonica,     Juridica,     etc.      Rome, 

1757  seqq. 
Flach.     Les   Origines   de   I'Aneienne   France.     Paris,    1886 

seqq. 
FuSTEL    de    Coulanges.     Histoire    des    Institutions    Poli- 

tiques  de  I'Aneienne  France.     Paris,  1901  seqq. 
Gams.     Series  Episcoporum.     Ratisbon,  1873. 

Kirchengeschichte   von    Spanien.     Ratisbon,  1862-1879. 

Gasquet.     De    I'Autorite   Impgriale    en   mati&re    religieuse 

a  Byzance.     Paris,   1879. 
Gforer.    Byzantinisehe   Geschichten.     Gratz,    1872-1877. 
Grauert.     Papstwahlstudien.     Historisches  Jahrbuch,  1899, 

XX,  266  seqq. 
Gregorovius.     Geschichte   der   Stadt   Rom   im   Mittelalter, 

5th  ed.     Stuttgart,  1902  seqq.     English  translation  by 

A.   Hamilton.     London,    1894. 
Grisar.     Geschichte  Roms  und  der  Papste  im  Mittelalter. 

Freiburg,  1901   seqq. 
GuiRAUD.     Questions  d'Histoire  et  d'Arch^ologie  Chrgtienne. 

Paris,  1906. 
Hartmann.     Geschichte    Italiens    im    Mittelalter.     Gotha, 

1897  seqq. 
Hatch.     The  Organization  of  the  Early  Christian  Churches. 

3d  ed,     London,  1888. 


246  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Hauck.     Kirehengeschichte  Deutschlands.     Sd  and  4th  ed. 

Leipzig,  1904. 
Die  Bischofswahlen  unter  den  Merovingern.     Eriangen, 

1883. 
Hefele.     Conciliengeschichte.     2d  ed.     Freiburg,  1873  seqq. 

A  new  and  considerably  improved   French   translation 

is  in  course  of  publication  since  1907  at  Paris. 
Heimbucher.     Die    Papstwahlen    unter    den    Karolingern. 

Augsburg,    1889. 
Hergenrother.  Photius.     Ratisbon,   1867-69. 
HergeneOther-Kirsch.  Kirehengeschichte,     Freiburg,  1902 

seqq. 
HiNSCHius.     Das  Kirchenrecht  der  Katholiken  und  Protea- 

tanten.     Berlin,  1869  seqq. 
HiBScn.     Der    Sinioniebegriff    und    eine    angebliche    Erwei- 

terung    desselben    im    elften    Jahrhundert.      Archiv    f. 

Kath.  Kirchenrecht,  1906,  Lxxxvi,  3-19, 
HoDQKiN.     Italy  and  Her  Invaders.     2d  ed.     Oxford,  1892 

seqq. 

The  Letters  of  Cassiodorus.     London,  1886, 

Imbabt  de  la  Toub.    Les  Elections  Episcopales  dans  I'Eglise 

de  France  du  IXe  au  Xlle  si&cle.     Paris,   1891, 
Les  Paroisses  Rurales  du  IVe  au  Xle  sifecle.     Paris, 

1900. 
Questions   d'Histoire   Sociale   et   Religieuse.     (Epoque 

Feodale).     Paris,   1907. 
Jageb,     University  Catholique,  1845,  xix,  281-89,  327-39, 
Kettebeb.     Karl  der  Grosse  und  die  Kirche.     Munich,  1898. 
Ketwich.     De  Simonia,     Leyden,  1845, 
Lampeecht,     Deutsche    Geschichte.     3d    ed,     Berlin,    Frei- 
burg, 1902  seqq. 
Langen.     Geschichte    der    romischen    Kirche.     Bonn,    1881 

seqq. 
Launoi,     Veneranda    Romanae    Ecclesiae    circa    Simoniam 

Traditio.     Paris,   1675.     In   his   Opera   Omnia    (1731), 

Tom,  II,  Pars  II, 
Leggy  de  la  Maeche.     Fondation  de   la  France   du  qua- 

trifeme  au  sixifeme  si&cle.     Lille,  1893. 
Leinz.     Die  Simonie.     Freiburg,  1902, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  247 

Leinz.     Zur    Begriflfsbestimmung    der    Simonie.     Arch.    f. 

Kath.    Kirchenrecht.    1897,   LXXVii,   267-72, 
Lesetre.    La    Paroisse.     Paris,    1906. 

LiNQAED.     Antiquities  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church.     Phila- 
delphia,  s.   d. 
Lipsius.     Die  Apokryphen  Apostelgeschichten  und  Apostel- 

legenden.     Brunswick,  1883-1890. 
Llotd.     The  North-African  Church.     London,  1880. 
LoEBELL.     Gregor  von  Tours  und  seine  Zeit.     Leipzig,  1839. 

(The  second  edition  has  remained  inaccessible  to  us). 
LoENiNG.     Geschichte  des  deutschen  Kirchenrechts.     Stras- 

burg,  1878. 
Lupus.     Synodorum  Generalium  ac  Provincialium  Decreta. 

Louvain,   1665. 
Maassen.     Geschichte    der    Quellen    des    Kanon.    Rechts. 

Gratz,    1870. 
MALi'ATTi.     Imperatori  e  Papi.     Milan,    1876. 
Malnoby.     Saint   C6saire,   eveque   d'Arles.     Paris,    1894. 
Mann.     The  Lives  of  the  Popes  in  the  Early  Middle  Ages. 

London  and   St.   Louis,    1902   seqq. 
Marin.     Les   Moines  de   Constantinople.     Paris,    1897. 
MoELLER.     Histoire  du  Moyen  Age.     Paris,   1898-1902. 
Natalis  Alexander.     Contra  Launojanas  circa  simoniam 

observationes  aniraadversio.     Paris,  1675. 
Neale.     a  History  of  the  Holy  Eastern  Church.     London, 

1850  seqq. 
Newman.     The   Arians   of    the    Fourth    Century.     London, 

1891. 
Pfeilschifter.     Theoderich  der  Grosse  und  die  katholische 

Kirche.     Munster,  1896. 
Phillips.     Kirchenrecht.      3d    ed.      Ratisbon,     1855    seqq. 

Esp.  vol.  VIII. 
Prou.     La  Gaule  M^rovingienne.     Paris,  s.  d. 
Ratzinger.     Die  Eigenkirche  des  Mittelalters.     Historisch- 

Pol.  Blatter,  1896,  cxviii,  45-50. 
Zur  Geschichte  des  kirehl.  Beneficialwesens.    Ibid.  1897, 

cxix,  846-852. 
Redslob.     Die    Verurteilung    der    Simonie    in    mystischer 

Redeform   in   neutestam.   Stellen   ausgesprochen.     Pro- 


248  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

gram  of  the  Akadem.  and  Realgymnasium  of  Hamburg. 

Hamburg,  1874,  1-20, 
Reumont.     Geschichte  der  Stadt  Rom.     Berlin,   1867   seqq. 
Roth.     Geschichte  des  Beneficialwesens.     Erlangen,  1850. 
Sagmullek,    Kath.   Kirchenrecht.     Ratisbon,    1900   seqq. 
Santi-Leitnee.      Praelectiones    Juris     Canoniei.      4th    ed. 

Ratisbon,    1905. 
ScHEEER.     Handbuch    des    Kirchenrechts.     Gratz,    1898. 
ScHiNDLER.     Zur   Geschichtl.  Entwicklung  des  Laienpatro- 

nats    u.    des    geistlichen    Patronats.     Archiv.    f.    Kath. 

Kirchenrecht,    1905,   Lxxxv,   489-515. 
SCHNEIDEE.     Kirchenrechtsquellen.     2d  ed.     Ratisbon,  1892. 
Smith-Cheetham.     Dictionary    of    Christian    Antiquities. 

London,   1875-1880. 
Smith- Wage.     Dictionary  of  Christian  Biography.     Boston, 

London,  1877  seqq. 
Snow.     St.  Gregory  the  Great.     London,   1892. 
Staudenmaiek.     Geschichte  der  Bischofswahlen.     Tubingen, 

1830. 
Stutz.     Geschichte    des    kirchl.    Beneficialwesens.      Berlin, 

1895. 

Die  Eigenkirche.     Berlin,    1895. 

Thomassin.     Vetus  et  Nova  Ecclesiae  Disciplina.     Mainz, 

1787. 
Vacandaed.     Etudes  de   Critique  et  d'Histoire  Religieuse. 

2d  ed.     Paris,    1906. 
Vaes.     La  Papautg  et  I'Eglise  Franque  Jl  I'Epoque  de  Gre- 

goire  le  Grand.     Revue  d'Hist.  Eccl.  1905,  vi,  537-556, 

755-784. 
Van  Espen.     Scripta  Omnia.     Louvain,  1753. 
Voelteb.     Der    Ursprung   des    Donatismus.     Freiburg   and 

Tubingen,  1883. 
Weeminqhof.     Geschichte  der  Kirchenverfassung  Deutsch- 

lands  im  Mittelalter.     Hanover  and  Leipzig,  1905. 
WiSBAUM.     Die  wichtigsten  Richtungen  u,  Ziele  der  Tatig- 

keit  Gregors  des  Grossen.     Cologne,  s.  d. 
Wolfsgeubee.     Gregor  der  Grosse.     Saulgau,  1890. 
WuEM.     Die    Papswahl,     ihre     Geschichte     u.     Gebrauehe. 

Cologne,  1902. 


INDEX 


Abel,  203. 

Acacius,  131  seq. 

Acoemetae,    132. 

Adeodatus,    192,    194. 

Aetherius,  97  seq. 

Agapitus,  84,   85. 

Agatho,  201. 

Agilbert,  212  seq. 

Agilulf,   150. 

Agnellus,   148  seq. 

Agroecius,  53. 

Aix-la-Chapelle,  council  of,  221, 

Albinus,   99. 

Alchima,  92. 

Alcuin,  205,  210,  211,  223. 

Ambrose,  1,  56. 

Ammianus   Marcellinus,   33. 

Anastasius,  of  Antioch,   136. 

Anastasius,  of  Corinth,  177  seq. 

Anastasius,  of  Thessalonica,  64. 

Anastasius,  chronicler,  84,  225. 

Anastasius,    emperor,    80,    133 

seq. 
Anastasius,    Sinaita,    175. 
Anastasius  II,  pope,  80. 
Anomoeans,   36. 
Anthimus,  86. 
Antioch,  council  of,  62. 
Antiochus,  135. 

Antoninus,  of  Ephesus,  39  seq. 
Antoninus,  subdeacon,  179  seq. 


Apollinaris,  92. 

Apostles,    canons    of,    64    seq., 

234. 
Aprunculus,  94. 
Aregius,  165,  167. 
Argentius,   187,   190  seq.,   193. 
Arians,  34  seq.,  42. 
Aristenus,  231. 
Armasius  or  Armatus,  72. 
Arno,  205. 
Athalaric,  82,  118. 
Athanasius,   34   seq. 
Audoenus,  218. 
Augustine,    60. 
Auxerre,  council  of,  169. 
Avitus,  97. 

Balsamon,  230  seq. 
Baluze,   110. 
Baronius,  171. 
Basil  1,  63  seq.,  234. 
Basilius,   79. 
Bathilde,  206. 
Belisarius,   86. 
Benedict  II,  201, 
Beregisilus,  96. 
Bettolenus,  207. 
Boniface  I,  pope,  79. 
Boniface   II,    82   seq.,    119. 
Boniface,    Saint,   203   seq. 
Bonneuil,  council  of,  218  seq. 
Braga,  synods  of,  128,  222. 

249 


250 


INDEX 


Brunehilde,   156,   158,  161,  165, 
168. 

Caesarius,  103,  115,  121. 
Callinicus,  182  seq. 
Candidas,  155. 
Carthage,    council    of,    31,    192 

seq. 
Castorius,   152. 
Cato,  95  seq. 
Cautinus,  95  seq. 
Cecilian,  28. 
Cenwalh,  212. 

Chahapivan,  council   of,   142. 
Chalcedon,  council  of,  48-50,  65 

seq.,    85,    109    seq.,    131,    133, 

137,  229,  234,  237. 
Chalon-sur-Saone,  synods  of,  51, 

169,  218  seq.,  220. 
Charlemagne,  204,  210,  211,  240. 
Charles  Martel,  209. 
Childebert  I,  122,  124,  125. 
Childebert    II,    100,    156,    159, 

160. 
Chramnus,  96. 
Claudius,  90. 
Clematius,  178. 

Clermont,  councils  of,  122,  125. 
Clichy,  council  of,  217. 
Clothaire  II,  156,  168,  216  seq. 
Clovis  I,  90  seq. 
Clovis   II,   218. 
Colluthus,   34. 
Columbanus,  158. 
Columbus,  191,   195. 
Conon,   201. 

Constantine,  30,  32,  35. 
Constantinople,  councils  of,  68, 

136. 


Constantius,  of  Milan,  183. 
Constantius,  of  Numidia,  186. 
Constantius,   deacon,   150. 
Cosmas,    226. 
Cyriacus,  165  seq.,  171. 
Cyril,    45,    48. 
Cyrus,  47. 

Dagobert,  158. 

Damasus,   33. 

Desiderius,   of   Eauze,   101. 

Desiderius,  of  Vienne,  161. 

Dinamius,   99. 

Dionysius  Exiguus,  65. 

Dioscorus,  of  Alexandria,  49. 

Dioscorus,  deacon,  83. 

Domnus,  47. 

Donus,  152. 

Drey,  64  seq. 

Duchesne,  81,  85,  87. 

Dudden,  194. 

Dwin,  council  of,  142. 

Eligius,  218. 
Elvira,  canon  of,  60. 
Emerita,  synod  of,  222. 
Emilian,  114. 
Ennodius,  81  seq. 
Ephesus,  council  of,  42. 
Ephesus,  robber-synod  of,  48. 
E  herius,  161. 
Eucaristus,   87    seq. 
Eufrasius,  bishop,   92. 
Eufrasius,   priest,  96  seq. 
Eulalius,    79. 
Eulogius,    of    Alexandria,    176 

seq. 
Eulogius,  of  Edessa,  47. 
Euphemius,  178. 


INDEX 


251 


Euplironius,  52,  53. 
Eusebius,  of   Caesarea,  26,   27. 
Eusebius,  of  Pelusiuin,  45,  50. 
Eusebius,  of  Valentinianopolis, 

39  seq. 
Eustathius,  46. 
Eutychians,    48. 
Eutychianus,    135. 
Evagrius,  136. 
Ewald,  185,  194. 

Facundus,  86  seq.,   110. 
Faustus,  88. 
Felicissimus,   187. 
Felix,  of  Clermont,  207. 
Felix  III,  pope,  80,  131  seq. 
Felix  IV,  82  seq. 
Festus,  80  seq. 
Firminus,   97. 
Firmus,    104. 
Flavian,  46. 

Forojulium,  council  of,  216. 
Frankfort,  council  of,  219. 
Fredegundis,   156,  166. 
Funk,  65. 

Galatia,   69. 

Gallus,  93  seq.,  102. 

Gams,   172,  211. 

Gaza,  council  of,  135. 

Gelasius,  87,  113. 

Gennadius,  of  Marseilles,  112. 

G.nnadius,     exarch,     188     seq., 

194. 
Gennadius,   patriarch,   68,   137, 

237. 
Genseric,  103  seq. 
Gerontius,    43. 


Gervald,  208. 

Giezi,  58,  142. 

Gildas,  105  seq. 

Gitton,  18. 

Glycerius,  73;  edict  of,  74  seq. 

Gregory  I,  1,  146  seq.,  200. 

Gregory    VII,    241. 

Gregory,  the  Illuminator,  142. 

Gregory,  Nazianzen,  37,  56. 

Gregory,  of  Tours,  91   seq. 

Grimo,   203. 

Grisar,   81. 

Guntram,  100  seq.,  156. 

Hadrian,  236. 

Hartmann,  81,  121,  194. 

Hauck,    101. 

Hefele,  194,  230  seq. 

Hegesippus,    23, 

Helladius,  43. 

Heraclius,  90. 

Hesychius,  41. 

Hilarion,  57. 

Hilary,  36. 

Hilgenfeld,    18. 

Himelco,  73,  77. 

Hodgkin,  118. 

Honoratus,  179  seq. 

Honorius,   79. 

Hormisdas,  deacon.  111. 

HormisdaSj,  pope,  84,  85,  126. 

Hunnerie,   104. 

Ibas,  47  seq.,  66. 

Impetratus,  94. 

Irenaeus,  23. 

Isaac,   142. 

Isidore,  of  Pelusium,  44  seq. 


252 


INDEX 


Isidore,  of  Seville,   108. 

Januarius,    151. 

Jerome,  1,  32,  36,  59, 

John,  of  Biclaro,  108. 

John,  of   Corinth,    178. 

John,  of  Prima  Justiniana,  177. 

John,   of  Tarragona,   126. 

John   Chrysostom,    1,   39    seqq., 

65. 
John,  the  deacon,  154,  181,  197. 
John  Eleemosynarius,  225. 
John    Scholasticus,    141. 
John  II,  pope,  84,  118. 
John  II,  the  Recluse,  134. 
Josephus,  18. 
Jovinus,  99. 

Judas,  17,  64,  106,  142. 
Julian,   109  seq. 
Justin,  Martyr,  18,  19,  23. 
Justin   II,  emperor,   136  seq. 
Justinian   I,   31,   83,    105,    116, 

135,  137  seq.,  173  seq. 

Kranzfelder,  22. 
Krusch,  207. 

Laban,  101. 

Laurentius,  antipope,  80  seq. 

Laurentius  I,  of  Milan,  81. 

Laurentius  II,  of  Milan,  150. 

Leinz,  2.  , 

Le  Camus,  18. 

Leo  I,  emperor,  50;  edict  of,  72. 

Leo  I,  pope,  50,  64,  109. 

Leo  III,  205. 

Leo,  of  Sens,  90. 

Leontius,  of  Egypt,  44. 


Leontius,  of  Neapolis,  225. 

Liberatus,   85. 

Liberius,  36. 

Licinius,  30. 

Lucilla,  28. 

Lucius,  46. 

Mainz,  council  of,  221. 

Majorinus,  28. 

Mann,   184. 

Mansi,   194  seq. 

Mantua,  capitulary  of,  214. 

Maras,    47. 

Marcellus,   99   seq. 

Marcian,  49. 

Marinian,  148  seq.,  182  seq. 

Maron,  45. 

Martinianus,  45. 

Maximianus,  187,  190  seq.,  193. 

Maximus   the   Cynic,   37   seq. 

Maximus,  of  Salona,  180  seqq. 

Maurice,   188. 

Meletian  bishops,  35. 

Mennas,   138  seq. 

Mensurius,  28. 

Milan,  edict  of,  30. 

Misenus,  131  seq. 

Mustekis,  186  seq. 

Narses,   89,   117. 

Natalis,  179. 

Nereida,    151. 

Nerses  II,  142. 

Newman,  36. 

Nicaea,  councils  of,  62,  228,  238. 

Nicetius,  217. 

Numidia,  council  of,  193  seq. 


INDEX 


253 


Odoacer,  79  seq.,  111. 

Orange,    councils   of,    121    seq., 

124. 
Ostrogoths,  78. 

Palladius,  cleric,  46. 

Palladius,   of  Helenopolis,   41. 

Pantaleo,  188. 

Paris,  council  of,  171,  216  seq. 

Paschal,  202. 

Patiens,    51. 

Patroclus,  51. 

Pansophius,  40. 

Paul,  of  Alexandria,  135. 

Paul,  of  Heraclea,  39. 

Paul,  of  Samosata,  27. 

Paul,  deacon,  178. 

Paul  II,  of  Chalon,  51. 

Paulinus,   191,  193. 

Pelagius  I,  pope,  1,  87,  89,  116 

seq. 
Pelagius  II,  87. 
Peter,  apostle,  16,  17,  20-24,  65, 

66,  106,   175. 
Peter,  of  Alexandria,  38. 
Peter,  of  Apamea,  135  seq. 
Peter,  of  Majuma,  50. 
Peter  Mongus,  131  seq. 
Pfeilschifter,  81. 
Philip,  19  seq. 
Placidina,  92. 
Platys,   201. 
Praetextatus,  33. 
Proclus,  46. 
Projectus,  207  seq. 
Prosmonarii,  67. 
Prosper  Tiro,  51. 
Protadius,  217. 
Proterius,  49  seq. 


Psoilus,  135. 

Quesnel,  110. 
Quintianus,  92  seq. 

Ragnimodus,  158. 

Remigius,    of    Bourges,    100. 

Remigius,  of  Rheims,  90. 

Rheims,  council  of,  217. 

Rome,  synods  of.  111,  113,  215. 

Rudborne,  213. 

Rusticus,  110. 

Sabas,  monk,  235. 

Sabas,  monk,  of  Palestine,  134. 

Sagittarius,  100. 

Salventius,  120. 

Samuel,  47. 

Sardica,  canons  of,  62. 

Schmiedel,  17. 

Seleucia-Ctesiphon,  council  of, 
144. 

Semo  Sancus,  23. 

Sens,  council  of,  169. 

Sergius,   202. 

Severus,  86. 

Sidonius,  51  seq.  , 

Silvanus,  29. 

Silverius,  84  seq. 

Simeon  Metaphrastes,  225. 

Simon,  of  Cyprus,  18. 

Simon  Magus,  1,  16;  history  of, 
17  seqq.,  58,  59,  etc. 

Simony,  origin  of  Avord,  1,  17; 
meaning  of,  2  seq.;  gravity 
of,  6  seq.;  penalties  against, 
8  seq. ;  opposed  to  natural 
law,  15  seq. 

Simplicius,  of  Bourges,  53. 


254 


INDEX 


Simplicius,  pope,   79  seq.,   131. 
Siricius,  55. 
Solofacialus,  131. 
Sulpicius  I,  of  Bourges,  100. 
Sulpicius  II,  of  Bourges,  206. 
Sulpicius  Severus,  59. 
Syagrius,  161,  165. 
Symmaehus,  80  seq.,   Ill,   113, 

115,  121. 
Syncletius,  41. 

Tarasius,  235  seq. 

Tertullian,  25. 

Theobald,   95. 

Theoctistus,  235. 

Theodat,  84  seq. 

Theodebert  I,  122. 

Theodebert    II,    156,    166,    168. 

Theodora,  85. 

Theodore,  archpriest,  202. 

Theodore,  biographer,  133. 

Theodore,  of  Mopsuestia,  47. 

Theodore,  of  Studium,  237  seq. 

Theodoret,  34. 

Theodoric  the  Great,  81,  82,  92 

seq.,  122. 
Theodoric   II,    156,    166,   168. 
Theodosius,  of  Auxerre,  90. 
Theodosius,    of     Contantinople, 

86. 
Theodosius,  of  Rodez,  98. 
Theodosius,      the      Ccenobiarch, 

133  seq. 
Theon,   46. 
Tbeophanes,  134. 
Thomas  Aquinas,  2,  15. 
Thomas,  of  Corinth,  178. 


Thomassin,  231  seq. 
Timothy  Ailuros,  49   seq. 
Toledo,    councils    of,    172,    211 

seq.,   222,   223. 
Tours,  council  of,  125. 
Transobadus,  98. 
Trullo,  council  in,  227. 
Tubingen  School,   17. 

Usener,  134. 

Valesius,  34. 

Van  Espen,  230  seq. 

Vergilius,   of    Aries,    158    seq., 

161. 
Victor,  of  Numidia,  191,  192. 
Victor,  of  Tunnunum,  104. 
Victor  Vitensis,   104. 
Vigilius,  85  seq.,  135. 
Vincentius,    187. 
Vitalis,  of  Milan,  89. 
Vitalis,  of  Truentum,   131   seq. 
Viventius,  93  seq. 

Waldo,   102. 

William  of  Malmesbury,  212. 

Wini,  212  seq. 

Wisbaum,   154. 

Wulfhere,  212  seq. 

Zachary,  203  seq. 

Zeck,   134. 

Zeno,  80,  131. 

Ze.  ophilian  investigation,  29. 

Zonaras,  230  seq. 

Zosimus,  45. 


THESES 


THESES 


The  Eucharistic  liturgy  of  the  Christian  Church, 
in  its  earliest  form,  was  largely  derived  from  the 
ritual  of  the  Synagogue. 


II 


For  a  considerable  period  in  the  early  history  of 
the  Western  Church  the  liturgical  language  in  com- 
mon use  was  Greek. 


Ill 


The  attitude  of  St.  Cyprian  towards  Pope  St. 
Stephen  in  the  controversy  over  the  rebaptism  of 
the  "  Lapsi "  does  not  prove  his  rejection  of  the 
supremacy  of  the  bishop  of  Eome. 


IV 


There  is  no  sufficient  reason  for  calling  into  ques- 
tion the  sincerity  of  Constantine's  conversion  to  the 


Christian  religion. 


The  charge  of  unjust  persecution  made  against  the 

3 


4  THESES 

Church  on  account  of  the  condemnation  and  exe- 
cution of  Priscillian  is  groundless. 

VI 

The  writings,  especially  the  correspondence,  of 
Gregory  the  Great  contain  admirable  principles  of 
Christian  political  economy. 

VII 

The  political,  social  and  economic  conditions  of 
Oriental  Christendom,  particularly  Syria  and  Egypt, 
explain,  to  a  great  extent  and  in  a  natural  way,  the 
rapid  propagation  of  Islam. 

VIII 

Previous  to  the  ninth  century,  one  of  the  causes 
of  simony  in  the  Christian  Church  was  the  influence 
of  the  civil  authority  in  ecclesiastical  affairs. 

IX 

Another  indirect  cause  of  simoniacal  abuses  in  the 
same  period  was  the  extensive  power  (social,  economic, 
political)  of  the  Christian  bishops. 


The  Crusades  exercised  directly  and  indirectly  an 
important  influence  on  the  social  and  economic  devel- 
opment of  Western  Europe. 


THESES  5 

XI 

The  Manichean  origin  of  the  Cathari  is  supported 
by  weighty,  though  not  absolutely  decisive  argu- 
ments. 

XII 

It  is  a  gross  historical  error  to  assert,  like  Charles 
Molinier,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Cathari  and  that 
of  the  Catholic  Church  regarding  marriage  are  identi- 
cal.    {Rev.  Hist  XXV,  1884,  p.  412.) 

XIII. 

In  Clement  VI  (1342-1352)  the  Avignon  Papacy 
found  a  fairly  typical  representative. 

XIV. 

The  so-called  Western  Schism,  inasmuch  as  it 
prejudiced  variously  public  opinion  against  the 
Papacy,  may  be  reckoned  among  the  causes  of  the 
religious  revolution  led  by  Martin  Luther. 

XV 

The  success  of  the  Reformation  in  Germany  was 
chiefly  owing  to  the  self-interested  support  given  the 
movement  by  secular  princes. 

XVI 

In  general,  the  lives  and  characters  of  the  Protest- 
ant Reformers  disprove  sufficiently  their  claims  to  a 
divine  mission. 


THESES 
XVII 


Whatever  may  be  thought  of  its  immediate  results, 
the  pontificate  of  Adrian  VI  (1523-1523)  opened  the 
way  to  genuine  and  lasting  reforms  in  ecclesiastical 
discipline  and  administration. 


XVIII 

The  conduct  of  the  French  King  Francis  I  de- 
terred Pope  Clement  VII  from  summoning  a  general 
council. 

XIX 

The  divine  vitality  of  the  Catholic  Church  was 
never  better  manifested  than  by  the  establishment 
and  efficiency  of  the  new  religious  orders  and  con- 
gregations which  stemmed  the  tide  of  the  Protestant 
Eeformation. 

XX. 

The  Peace  of  Augsburg  (1555),  though  it  did  not 
attain  its  purpose  of  pacifying  Germany,  marks 
nevertheless  an  important  epoch  and  may  be  said  to 
close  the  first  phase  in  the  history  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. 

XXI 

The  Thirty  Years'  War  not  only  entailed  political 
ruin  on  Germany,  but  was  also  disastrous  for  the 
Catholic  Church  in  that  land. 

XXII 

It  is  not  true  that  progress,  social,  political,  Intel- 


THESES  7 

lectiial  and  moral  owes  more  to  Protestantism  than 
to  Catholicism. 

XXIII 

The  French  Eevolution  was  hastened  by,  and  re- 
ceived its  actual  form,  through  the  wide  dissemination 
of  deistic  and  rationalistic  literature. 

XXIV 

The  "  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy "  was  an 
unjust  encroachment  on  the  rights  of  the  Church 
and  a  schismatic  act,  whose  chief  purpose  was  to 
justify  Gallicanism  and  Jansenism,  and  to  avenge 
their  repeated  condemnation  by  the  Holy  See, 

XXV 

The  educational  reforms  introduced  by  Johann 
Ignaz  von  Felbiger  (1724-1788)  in  German-speaking 
lands,  though  not  commendable  in  every  respect,  were 
nevertheless  productive  of  good  results,  and  inaugur- 
ated the  fruitful  labors  of  Overberg,  Hirscher,  Sailer, 
and  others. 

XXVI 

Doctrinam  concilii  Vaticani,  juxta  quam  humanae 
rationi  rectae  evolutae  adscribitur  potentia  physica 
ad  Deum  rerum  omnium  principium  et  finem  ex 
rebus  creatis  certo  cognoscendum,  contra  Modernistas 
qui  rationis  virtutem  phaenomenis  includi  nee  ea 
praetergredi  posse  autumant,  defenden'dam  suscipi- 
mus.  (Encyc.  Pasceiidi  Dominici  Gregis,  Denzinger, 
2072.) 


8  THESES 

XXVII 

Doetrina  concilii  Tridentini  iuxta  quam  totus 
Adam  per  praevaricationis  offensam  secundum  corpus 
et  animam  in  deterius  commutatus  fuit,  nocuitque 
non  sibi  soli,  sed  etiam  suae  propagini  universae, 
principiis  scientiae  veri  nominis  nequit  dici  adversa. 

XXVIII 

Theoria  Privationis,  secundum  quam  naturalia  per- 
manserunt  integra,  non  tamen  sine  vera  deordina- 
tione  ab  oeconomia  divinitus  stabilita  extra  quam 
homo  nascitur  donis  gratuitis  divinis  destitutus, 
rationem  huius  peccati  transmissi  optima  reddit. 

XXIX 

Christus  Jesus  Dominus  Noster  vere  ac  proprie 
Deus  est. 

XXX 

Dari  instans  quo  conscientia  sui  uti  Dei  in  anima 
Christi  inceperit  documentis  Novi  Testamenti  ostendi 
nequit;  historico  proinde  fundamento  carent  variae 
illae  derivationis  theoriae  quae  asserunt  Christum 
non  ab  initio  fuisse  conseium  sui,  sed  conscientiam 
suae  dignitatis,  suaeque  usque  ad  mortem  missionis 
nonnisi  mediate  ac  gradatim  ex  perpensis  circum- 
stantiis  sibi  acquisivisse. 

XXXI 

Veritas   et   sinceritas   scientiae  experimentalis   in 


THESES  9 

Christo  ac  proinde  vera  quoad  eamdem  progressio, 
nullatenus  minuuntur,  per  amplitudinem  altioris 
scientiae,  puta,  beatae  vel  infusae,  quam  Domino 
vindicamus. 

XXXII 

Celeberrimo  loco  (Marci,  x,  45;  Matthaei,  xx,  28) 
Christus  veram  relationem  inter  mortem  suam  et  re- 
missionem  peccatomm  declaravit  ac  stabilivit;  nee 
dici  potest;,  prout  placet  recentioribus  quibusdam 
Subjectivismi  labe  infectis  sustinere,  valorem  hunc 
objectivum,  morti  suae  a  Christo  adscriptum,  doc- 
trinae  salutis  ab  Ipso  in  parabolis  enuntiatae  adver- 
sari. 

XXXIII 

Eamdem  relationem  Christus  in  ultima  coena 
solenmiter  expressit. 

XXXIV 

Negamus  proinde  Sancto  Paulo  veluti  primo  vero- 
que  auctori  doctrinam  salutiferae  mortis  Christi  esse 
adscribendam. 

XXXV 

Conceptum  satisfactionis  summe  moralem  exhibet 
systematica  ilia  Eedemptionis  doctrina  ab  Angelico 
Doctore  exposita;  nee  verum  est  quod  plures  recenti- 
ores  contendunt,  notiones  insociabiles  in  hac  pulcher- 
rima  synthesi  simul  congeri  atque  conjungi. 

XXXVI 

Pulcherrimam  illam  a   Sancto  Doctore  traditam 


10  THESES 

gratiae  analysim,  quae  donum  illud  exhibet  per 
modum  qualitatis  animam  in  suo  esse  intrinsece  per- 
ficientis,  tota  amplitudine  sua  defendendam  susei- 
pimus. 

XXXVII 

Hanc  notionem  gratiae  veluti  doni  intus  suscepti, 
alienam  omnino  a  mente  Sancti  Pauli  fuisse  atque  a 
Sancto  Augustino  adinventam,  negamus. 

XXXVIII 

Eeali  sed  proportionali  tantum  sensu  intelligenda 
venit  doctrina  profunda  ilia  juxta  quam  gratia  a 
Sancto  Thoma  veluti  naturae  divinae  participatio 
definitur. 

XXXIX 

Nee  dici  potest  cum  recentioribus  quibusdam  hanc 
deificationis  doctrinam  ex  philosophis  paganis  de- 
promptam  fuisse. 

XL 

Huic  autem  gratiae  divinae  additur  nobilissimus 
omnium  virtutum  comitatus  quae  in  animam  cum 
gratia  sanctificante  simul  infunduntur,  quibusque 
anima  ad  supernaturaliter  operandum  disponitur. 

XLI 

Lex  est  regula  et  mensura  non  physice  necessitans 
nee  mere  dirigens  ac  suadens  sed  obligans,  id  est, 
voluntatem  absolute  astringens  ad  aliquid  agendum 
vel  omittendum. 


THESES  11 


XLII 


Existit  veri  nominis  lex  moralis,  omnibus  legibus 
humanis  anterior,  superior,  universalior,  quae  idcirco 
naturalis  vocatur  quia  natura  indita  est  a  Summo 
eius  Auctore,  et  ab  ipsa  natura  docetur. 


XLIII 

Norma  proxima  discriminans  aetiones  humanas 
rectas  a  pravis,  est  ipsa  humana  natura  complete  et 
adaequate  spectata,  remota  autem  norma  est  divina 
essentia. 

XLIV 

Per  legem  supernaturalem  Jesus  Christus  "  prae- 
cepta  morum  naturalia  perfecit  et  ad  summum 
adduxit  declarando,  interpretando,  sanciendo."  (Leo 
XIII,  TametsL) 

XLV 

"  Quoniam  ad  perdendas  familias,  frangendasque 
regnorum  opes  nihil  tam  valet  quam  corruptela 
morum,  facile  perspicitur  prosperitati  familiarum  ac 
civitatum  maxime  inimica  esse  divortia,  quae  a 
depravatis  populorum  moribus  nascuntur,  ac  teste 
rerum  usu,  ad  vitiosiores  vitae  privatae  ac  publicae 
consuetudines  aditum  januamque  patefaciunt."  (Leo 
XIII,  Encycl.  Arcanum.) 

XLVI 

Manente  vinculo  multae  sunt  causae  ob  quas 
"  separatio  quoad  torum  seu  quoad  cohabitationem 
ad  certum  incertumve  tempus  "  fieri  potest. 


12  THESES 


XLVII 


Ecclesia  bona  temporalia  potest  acquirere  et  possi- 
dere  et  quidem  jure  naturali  et  divino. 

XLVIII 

Solido  caret  fimdamento  opinio  quae  Eomano 
Pontifici  denegat  ius  suum  efficaciter  designandi 
successorem. 

XLIX 

Jurisdictio  quam  in  commissas  sibi  dioeceses  habent 
episcopi,  ipsis  immediate  a  Eomano  Pontifice  con- 
fertur. 


Vicarii  Generalis  potestas  se  extendit  ad  omnia 
quae  pertinent  ad  ordinariam  jurisdictionem  episco- 
palem,  iis  exceptis  quae  vel  a  jure,  vel  ab  episcopo 
specialiter  reservantur. 

LI 

"  Licet  etiam  longaevae  consuetudinis  non  sit  vilis 
auctoritas,  non  tamen  est  usque  adeo  valitura,  ut 
vel  iuri  positivo  debeat  prae judicium  generare,  nisi 
fuerit  rationabilis  et  legitime  sit  praescripta."(Cap. 
xi^  De  Gonsuetudine.) 

LII 

Sponsalia,  quae  non  juxta  normam  Decreti  "Ne 
temere  "  contrahunter,  nullos  sortiuntur  effectus  sive 
in  foro  extemo  sive  in  interno. 


THESES  13 


LIII 


The  deutero-canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
were  regarded  as  sacred  by  the  early  Church. 


LIV 


There  are  many  weighty  reasons  to  call  into  ques- 
tion the  geographical  universality  of  the  Deluge. 


LV 


We  deny  the  value  of  the  arguments  adduced  by 
certain  critics  to  prove  the  biblical  narrative  of 
Samson  a  mere  legend  or  myth. 

LVI 

The  seeming  contradiction  between  the  narrative  of 
Josue,  x^  12-13,  and  the  teaching  of  astronomy  offers 
no  real  objection  to  the  doctrine  of  Biblical  inerrancy. 

LVII 

Psalm  II  is  Messianic  in  its  import. 

LVIII 

The  theory  of  subsequent  inspiration,  that  a  book 
written  by  purely  human  endeavor  becomes  Sacred 
Scripture  on  the  subsequent  approbation  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  or  on  the  declaration  of  the  Church  certifying 
that  the  book  contains  revelation  without  error,  is 
false. 


14  THESES 

LIX 

The  council  of  Trent  by  declaring  the  Vulgate 
authentic,  did  not  thereby  prefer  it  to  the  original 
texts,  or  the  ancient  Oriental  versions;  but  only  to 
the  other  Latin  versions  then  in  circulation;  neither 
did  the  council  forbid  the  use  of  the  original  texts 
and  versions,  especially  for  private  and  critical  pur- 
poses. 

LX 

The  word  "  authentic  "  in  the  decree  "  Insuper  " 
of  the  council  of  Trent  is  to  be  taken  in  its  Juridical 
sense  to  mean  authoritative — not  in  its  modern  histo- 
rico-critical  sense  to  mean  genuine. 

LXI 

The  decree  "  Lamentabili "  rightly  condemns  the 
opinion  that  "  Divine  inspiration  is  not  to  be  ex- 
tended to  the  whole  of  Sacred  Scripture  in  such 
a  way  as  to  render  each  and  every  part  immune  from 
all  error."     (Prop,  xi.) 

LXII 

..."  It  is  not  lawful  for  the  Catholic  exegete  to 
solve  the  difficulties  occurring  in  certain  texts  of 
Sacred  Scripture,  which  appear  to  relate  historical 
facts,  by  asserting  that  in  them  there  is  question  of 
a  tacit  or  implicit  quotation  of  a  document  written 
by  a  non-inspired  author  and  that  the  inspired  author 
did  not  at  all  intend  to  approve  or  adopt  all  these 


THESES  15 

assertions,  which  cannot,  therefore,  be  held  to  be  free 
from  error; 

"  Unless,  due  regard  being  had  for  the  sense  and 
judgment  of  the  Church,  it  is  proved  by  solid  argu- 
ments: 1)  that  the  sacred  writer  has  really  quoted 
the  sayings  or  documents  of  another;  and  2)  that 
he  has  neither  approved  nor  adopted  them,  so  that  he 
may  be  properly  considered  not  to  be  speaking  in 
his  o^vn  name."  (Decision  of  Bibl.  Commission, 
March  27,  1905,  in  Bev.  Bibl,  1905,  p.  161.) 

LXIII 

The  "  Old  Latin  "  translation  of  the  Bible  probably 
originated  in  Northern  Africa. 

LXIV 

Eevelation  cannot  be  rejected  on  the  ground  that  it 
is  impossible. 

LXV 

Miracles    possess   undoubted    evidential    value    in 

establishing  the  fact  of  revelation. 

LXVI 

It  is  a  mistake  to  hold  that  if  miracles  took  place 
our  confidence  in  the  uniformity  of  nature's  laws 
would  be  seriously  shaken. 

LXVII 

To  reject  the  belief  in  revealed  religion  on  account 


16  THESES 

of  mysteries  therein  contained  cannot  approve  itself 
to  the  unprejudiced  mind. 

LXVIII 

The  Church  of  Christ  having  been  established  as 
a  visible  legal  organization  centred  in  a  visible 
authority  of  divine  institution,  is  characterized  by 
the  essential  mark  of  unity. 

LXIX 

This  note  is  to  be  found  realized  in  the  Eoman 
Catholic  Church  alone. 


LXX 

Among  the  natural  causes  favoring  the  propaga- 
tion of  Christianity  none  contributed  more  efficiently 
than  the  fact  that  the  Jewish  people  were  scattered 
throughout  the  Graeco-Eoman  world. 

LXXI 

The  irreconcilable  opposition  between  the  Christian 
and  pagan  view  of  human  life  and  destiny  rendered 
their  coexistence  impossible. 

LXXII 

The  Decian  persecution  may  be  said  to  have  pro- 
duced at  least  indirectly  many  good  effects  in  the 
Christian  Church. 


THESES  17 


LXXIII 


Among  the  many  writings  which  have  come  down 
to  us  bearing  the  name  of  St.  Clement  of  Eome, 
it  is  more  likely  that  that  known  as  I  Clement  to  the 
Corinthians  can  alone  be  ascribed  to  him  with  abso- 
lute certainty, 

LXXIV 

It  can  be  proved  directly  and  indirectly  that  Hippo- 
lytus  is  the  author  of  the  "  Philosophumena." 

LXXV 

The  conduct  and  writings  of  Eusebius  of  Cassarea 
give  evidence  that  he  was  friendly  towards  the  Arians 
and  favored  at  least  for  a  time  their  doctrine. 

Vidit  Sacra  Faeultas: 

Joannes  T.  Creagh,  J.  U.  D.,  p.  t.  Decanus. 
Carolus  F.  Aiken,  S.  T.  D.,  p.  t.  a  Secretis. 

Vidit  Pro-Rector  Universitatis : 

Thomas  J.  Shahan,  S.  T.  D. 


\ 

'e 


Princeton  Theoloaical , .fem'nf,'?',,,l7'^r|f,[}," 


T  1012  01234  9603 


DATE  DUE 

,  .  ".-^^ 

)m 

mm^ 

m 

